Why some believers and nonbelievers don't see eye to eye on free will

[CarlinKnew]

Here are two perspectives on free will, an atheist's and a theist's. For the sake of argument, they both assume that a god exists, the god is responsible for what he causes to happen, and the god creates a person named Jim.

Atheist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
Conclusion: The god is responsible for Jim's behavior.

Theist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
4. Magic? *
Conclusion: The god is not responsible for Jim's behavior.

* Help me comprehend this reasoning!I'd like to understand the theist's point of view.

 

[Skwim]

As simply as I can put this:

Perspectives on free will

Nonbelievers:
1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment
4. Person's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment
Conclusion: Deity is responsible for person's behavior

Believers:
1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment
4. Person's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment
5. Magic? *
Conclusion: Deity is not responsible for person's behavior

* Help me understand this reasoning!

Heck, I don't even understand your post. Since when do all nonbelievers claim

1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen?
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will?
3. Deity designs person's environment?

 

[LuisDantas]

Free Will is one of the most ill-defined concepts that I have ever met. The only two things that I can say about it with any certainty is that it is offered as the explanation of why the Abrahamic God doesn't simply make the world be as it would please him, and that it is opposed to extreme determinism.

I don't think it is a concept worth using. It doesn't really mean anything.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Heck, I don't even understand your post. Since when do all nonbelievers claim

1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen?
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will?
3. Deity designs person's environment?

Well, in the title I did say "some". And if we assume a deity exists for the sake of argument, you would disagree with those points?

 

[LuisDantas]

Heck, I don't even understand your post. Since when do all nonbelievers claim

1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen?
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will?
3. Deity designs person's environment?

I think he is using "believer" in the sense of "believer in free will". The premise seems to be that atheists believe in Free Will instead of in God.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Hmm wow I didn't think there would be any confusion. Edited the original post for clarity...

 

[LuisDantas]

Out of curiosity, why exactly are you presenting belief in free will as strongly associated with atheism? Far as I can tell, the concept was created by Christian theists for their own use.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Out of curiosity, why exactly are you presenting belief in free will as strongly associated with atheism? Far as I can tell, the concept was created by Christian theists for their own use.

Usually believer = religious person; nonbeliever = nonreligious person. Anyway I changed it to atheist/theist now. Looking forward to some theist arguments.

 

[Skwim]

Well, in the title I did say "some".

Which, in light of your post that had the category "nonbelievers," made little sense. Hence my remark.

And if we assume a deity exists for the sake of argument, you would disagree with those points?

Even after having changed your OP, I still don't know of any atheist who, after agreeing for sake of argument that a deity existed, would go on to say,

1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment

 

[CarlinKnew]

Man, that was a rough start for a thread. Am I crazy or does the original post make sense now? (I thought it made sense the first time). Anyway I'm hoping to understand the believer/theist point of view.

 

[LuisDantas]

Perspectives on free will, assuming a deity exists:

Atheist:
1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment
4. Person's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment
Conclusion: Deity is responsible for person's behavior

If I understood you correctly, that is a demonstration of why exactly the concepts of Free Will and of a Abrahamic-styled God do indeed contradict each other rather directly. That many people sincerely claim to believe in both shows how powerful contradictory statements can be; people assume that it is their own fault that they fail to see a coherent meaning in the claims being made.

Theist:
1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment
4. Person's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment
5. Magic? *
Conclusion: Deity is not responsible for person's behavior

* Help me understand this reasoning!

Far as I can tell, free will is just a name. Usually, the name that theists give to the constatation that life does not behave as if God existed. Giving it a name makes them feel somewhat empowered and allowed to claim that it was "meant" so, and part of God's unescrutable will.

In other words, the concept survives because it is too ill-defined and too contradictory with its own premise to allow for a true refutation. It depends on exceptions to logic to even exist, so it is in fact immune to logical refutations.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Even after having changed your OP, I still don't know of any atheist who, after agreeing for sake of argument that a deity existed, would go on to say,

1. Deity is responsible for what he causes to happen
2. Deity designs person's brain/soul/will
3. Deity designs person's environment

..............
If a deity existed, he wouldn't be responsible for what he caused to happen? Now I'm really at a loss. Where's the confusion here?

 

[LuisDantas]

Man, that was a rough start for a thread. Am I crazy or does the original post make sense now? (I thought it made sense the first time). Anyway I'm hoping to understand the believer/theist point of view.

Sorry that it is being so hard, but I truly believe that it is the subject matter itself that causes these difficulties. Best of luck in finding the answers you seek.

 

[CarlinKnew]

If I understood you correctly, that is a demonstration of why exactly the concepts of Free Will and of a Abrahamic-styled God do indeed contradict each other rather directly. That many people sincerely claim to believe in both shows how powerful contradictory statements can be; people assume that it is their own fault that they fail to see a coherent meaning in the claims being made.

Yes, thank you. That is my point of view; I'm hoping to understand the other side of the argument.

Far as I can tell, free will is just a name. Usually, the name that theists give to the constatation that life does not behave as if God existed. Giving it a name makes them feel somewhat empowered and allowed to claim that it was "meant" so, and part of God's unescrutable will.

In other words, the concept survives because it is too ill-defined and too contradictory with its own premise to allow for a true refutation. It depends on exceptions to logic to even exist, so it is in fact immune to logical refutations.

At the moment I agree with you on this.

 

[Skwim]

..............
If a deity existed, he wouldn't be responsible for what he caused to happen?

Not if the atheist believed the deity lacked free will.

 

[CarlinKnew]

Not if the atheist believed the deity lacked free will.

let's assume the deity has free will for the sake of argument, or let's just assume that he is responsible for what he causes to happen.... for the sake of argument

btw thanks for being so difficult

 

[Skwim]

let's assume the deity has free will for the sake of argument, or let's just assume that he is responsible for what he causes to happen.... for the sake of argument

btw thanks for being so difficult

Hey, I didn't make up the scenario. The devil is in the details, and if you don't want to take them into account then this is what you're apt to get: questions for clarification.

 

[.lava]

Here are two perspectives on free will, an atheist's and a theist's. For the sake of argument, they both assume that a god exists, the god is responsible for what he causes to happen, and the god creates a person named Jim.

Atheist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
Conclusion: The god is responsible for Jim's behavior.

Theist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
4. Magic? *
Conclusion: The god is not responsible for Jim's behavior.

* Help me comprehend this reasoning!I'd like to understand the theist's point of view.

i think answer is vices of ego. the number of vices is certain and would not change. but each person has different level of every vice he has. for example gossipping is a vice. i have it and everyone has it. but none of us has it at the exact same level or not everyone does it with the same intention. just like diversity of environment, there is diversity in how our egos designed. where we were born into, where and under which conditions we grow up is not chosen by us. IMO environment we are in is chosen according to our capability and i don't believe people would be given experiences that they could not over come by using their intellect and conscience. if they fail, that means they gave into vices of ego, not the environment. vices of ego, which vices demand most among others and how strong it is is equally (or maybe more) varied

.

 

[Tathagata]

Here are two perspectives on free will, an atheist's and a theist's.

No such thing as atheist and theist free will.

For the sake of argument, they both assume that a god exists, the god is responsible for what he causes to happen, and the god creates a person named Jim.

For the sake of argument? I don't care what context, how can there be a scenario where an Atheist assumes God? This proposition defeats the whole point of the Atheist position.

Atheist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
Conclusion: The god is responsible for Jim's behavior.

First of all, no. The Atheist can't believe that. Second of all, just because a person is designed and their environment is designed, it does not negate free will nor affirm determinism.

Theist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
4. Magic? *

Magic? Why? I don't see that as the least bit relevant.

Conclusion: The god is not responsible for Jim's behavior.

According to Theists, God granted us free will. But this is impossible because God knows what your every move is and knows your future destiny, so you have no free will to act to the contrary. Also, God is apparently in control of everything including us because he's the omnipotent one.

 

[Mister Emu]

Theist's perspective:
1. The god designs Jim's brain/soul/will.
2. The god designs Jim's environment.
3. Jim's behavior is the result of his brain/soul/will interacting with the environment.
4. Magic? *
Conclusion: The god is not responsible for Jim's behavior.

There is no premise four, the issue is within premise one. How the soul is designed/created.

The theist who believes in a creator deity and free will believes that man was created as a free agent able to make choices.