Do I care if people are nice because : they fear Hell, they fear the law, they choose to be nice, or the neural connections in their brain program them to behave that way ?
I once told a friend that I did not care about her, that I was only motivated by how good it made me feel to be nice to her. I was not bothered if she were harmed, I was only bothered by how devastated I would be if she came to harm. When I did something particularly good, I explained that there was no real choice for me to do otherwise.
I believe we are in a deterministic universe. Physics is physics and it doesn't change just because it happened to form a brain. All of the energy/matter started off in a particular configuration and so our solar system formed in a particular way which caused every event after that to happen and it couldn't have happened in any other way.
Do we have free will? Well it depends on how you look at it. I chose to type this message out, but I was always going to do so. Whether you call that a choice is up to you.....or is it?
"Free will." It's such an interesting concept.
I choose my own actions in response to whatever situation I'm in. I have that power (though I can't choose the situations the same way: I'm not God). In any situation, I choose what I choose because I am who I am. I can't choose otherwise—to do that I would have to be someone else. What kind of freedom is there in not being yourself?
Let us suppose I'm faced with a choice: someone with power over me says, "Either take these drugs here and now, or I'll have you strapped to a table and force-fed them." What do I do? That depends on who I am. Can I change who I am? Perhaps, but who I decide to be depends on who I already am, so... what kind of person does the kind of person I am want to be?
Whatever I choose, I choose it because I am who I am.
Whatever I am, I am because of past choices—which I made because of who I was. And why would I want to be anyone else? I'm not that kind of person.
@geoff1000 I find your post rather confusing and illogical.
"I once told a friend that I did not care about her, that I was only motivated by how good it made me feel to be nice to her." If that is your motivation, why then tell her you don't care about her? That statement is almost certain to hurt her feelings.
"I was not bothered if she were harmed, I was only bothered by how devastated I would be if she came to harm." This doesn't make sense. If you're not bothered if she were harmed, why would you be devastated if she were harmed?
You seem to want to impress that your greatest concern is how you would feel rather than be concerned about what befalls your friends. This doesn't seem like an endearing quality, so yeah I'm puzzled by your post.
@Sideon I think your argument against religionists is a strawman argument. That is your personal belief about what religionists think of free will.
"Religionists would pair free will with being free from sin."
Would they? I'm a person of faith and I don't think that way. I doubt I'm the only one. Free will and being free from sin don't necessarily go together. We are given free will because it's a necessary component to love God. An automaton cannot love. It can be made to act in a way that mimics love, but it wouldn't be real love. So God gave us free will so we can freely choose to love him. It was a risky move on God's part because we can use that free will to ignore him, or to live a life full of sin and evil.
We have free will because God expects us to make good choices and holds us accountable for bad choices. God wouldn't be just if our actions were determined for us and yet he'd hold us accountable for those actions. But God is just, and loving, and truthful, and holy, etc. so he wouldn't command us to do or not do certain things if we didn't have the power to freely make those choices.
"The religionist definition is inherently flawed because free will is used as a bludgeon to "choose to be righteous" - that's not a choice - that's a mandate."
It is a choice. One of the ways we love (verb) God is to do what pleases him. Would it be a mandate if a bride chooses to do things to please her husband?
My comment is based on God's nature, but others may have different beliefs about the nature of God. That's a whole new thread topic.
@exsanguinate To answer the OP's questions, according to my beliefs and opinions:
"Does free will exist?"
Yes, our choices are our own, and so are the consequences of them, both good and bad.
"Do you think it’s an innate feature of our species? If not, from where does it derive?"
Yes it is innate, but it doesn't derive from deterministic chemical reactions as these could never evolve to produce a living brain/mind capable of thinking thoughts and making choices that are independent of deterministic chemical reactions. Instead it derives from God, the one immortal sentient being, the mind that conceived the universe and us, making us a spiritual being inhabiting a material body. (as in Genesis chapters 1 and 2: physical body plus breath (spirit) from God = living soul.)
"If we have free will, is it possible to deprive another of their own?"
Maybe not 100%, but we can limit another person's choices.
"Is free will more nuanced than simply having it, or lacking it?"
I guess you have it, even if you don't make use of it. And not using it can also be a free will choice. As long as that is your choice and not something that you were tricked into relinquishing such as with hypnotism (temporary) or demonic possession (longer term).
There is also mind control, which seems to remove a substantial portion of free will, but not entirely. Read the book "The trance-formation of America" by Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien to see how Cathy O'Brien was affected by mind control. Caution: it's a very harrowing read, and victims of sexual abuse may find it too traumatic to read.
@Comfy_Arms It is about as confusing as when she told me "You can retire whenever you want, as long as you keep working".
@Comfy_Arms Thanks for sharing your perspective. I grew up in a highly religious environment, so I get some of the cultural ideas and sentiments, but the idea equating obedience and love is 100% abhorrent to me - which is why I'm not of that or any organized faith. God gives to get? Obey, and he loves you? That's a demand and the illusion of choice. Free will has been/is used as a bludgeon by organized religion for centuries.
Love is unconditional, period, and if a faith teaches something different, then I lump it in the same cult mind-set that I grew up with. If you want labels, I'm a neo-pagan agnostic: why have one god when I can have them all?
I'll leave you with my favorite graphical depiction of free will, care of Neil Gaiman. Dream, of the Endless, and Lucifer Morningstar... having a chat about personal responsibility and "the devil made me do it."
Carry on, @exsanguinate, it's all yours.
Yes free will exist but so do repercussions
I like the exchange in "The Magnificent Seven" ( or maybe one of the sequels ) where the bandits have given the Seven a rough time and some of them are thinking of quitting. A says "We took the farmers' money, we made a contract" B says "Not a promise that any court would enforce" C says "Those are the ones you REALLY have to keep"
It isn't virtuous, when you do the right thing, knowing that God or the Justice Department will punish you otherwise. Being virtuous is doing the right thing, when the only witness and critic will be yourself.
@geoff1000 Right and wrong only exist if you believe in free will. If you do not, and believe fully in determinism, you never did right because you chose what to do because of the way you were wired or the environment that shaped you. Therefore your choice was shaped by forces beyond your control. Surprisingly, no one has mentioned compatibilism which is the belief that free will and determinism exist without logical contradictions because the moment determines which comes to the forefront. That belief is ridiculed in some philosophical circles as “the wafflers” because they won’t take a side.
Ignoring free will, then i could do what i like with another person and blame it on things beyond my control - madness.!.
As someone who doesn’t believe in free will, I can confirm that I act as an insane hooligan more often than not; I rob stores, burn down maternity wards, and am exceedingly fond of human flesh. The capacity for mindless barbarism is always there, ready to consume me.
No. Not really. I live a pretty boring existence.
This is because I realize that acting ridiculous will not go well for me. The risk is far greater than the reward.
Now, someone might say “Hur hur so you CHOOSE to not do bad things! That’s free will!”
To such a person I’d say: relax. Take a deep breath. Focus.
My choosing to avoid reprehensible activities is not a means of expressing free will. It is driven, primarily, by the society in which I live, which is shaped by cultural norms and so on. Furthermore, what’s considered reprehensible varies depending on time and location.
It’s very amusing to me that disbelieving in free will only ever results in a propensity for limitless violence and horror (according to those who believe they possess free will). That propensity is innate in us as a species, whether one believes that they’re in control or not.
Edited for clarity.
@exsanguinate You are describing fatalism in the final paragraph. It is a common fallacy to conflate determinism and fatalism and they are different.
@FunCartel
That final paragraph does diverge from the main topic. Others have been going into wacky tangents on morality, so I figured “Why not?”
Forget morality. Bring me the Purge
@pmvines Why do you keep quoting Karen Carpenter?
There is a false equivalence between "disbelieving in free will" and the "propensity for limitless violence and horror." They're not connected, not causal, not related. @exsanguinate , you bring up morality as if it's a topical tangent, but front and center you choose to avoid reprehensible activities and not act out your insane hooligan sadisms. Bully for you, and humanity keeps you in the gene pool. Happy swimming.
@FunCartel she is my spirit animal I suppose
@Sideon
I didn’t initially bring up morality. I never said that, without free will, people would act like barbarians. Other people in this thread have gone on about those things. People who are certain that they have free will.
That seems very self-serving to me. “HEY I’M GREAT AND SPECIAL AND UNIQUE. Those people who don’t believe in free will? Wild animals, the lot of them. I am in control and responsible.”
I don’t find any of that very convincing. It appears puerile.
I think that free will can be more dangerous.
A person who is "programmed" to avoid the punishment of law, or God, is reasonably reliable. A person who decides to exercise their free will to do something unpredictable, cannot be relied upon ; like a co-pilot deciding to nose-dive his airliner into the Alps.
@geoff1000 - The very religious definitely don't say that everything that happens is God's will. They only say that about good things that happen "Thank God" is the refrain. But when something bad happens, when do you hear the ultra-religious say "Blame God" or "It's God's fault", no, you will never hear that. It's selective causation; God is only responsible for the good things that happen.
@UKGuy My experience of ultra religious people is that when "bad" things happen they say : God takes the one's he wants, early ; or He was just testing my faith
Think of someone who has lost their family in a house fire. Now think of someone waiting with their family in the departure lounge of an airport, hoping to catch a flight to a permanent holiday in heaven ; and the airline bumps their family onto an earlier flight.
Out of curiosity, @Comfy_Arms, if we think of God as a potter....
Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use (say, a soup bowl or a flower vase or something) and another for dishonorable use (like a chamber pot)? What if God prepared some people as vessels of destruction and others as vessels of mercy: the bad folks to show his wrath and make known his power and, you know, really show off how awesome the riches of his glory are by contrast?
I mean, if God creates everyone—every last part of them, down to the tiniest neuron—then he's the one who makes people good or bad. And yeah, this might make you want to say something like, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" But come on. He has the right, you know.
And who says this eradicates free will? A person made a certain way will act a certain way because, frankly, that's how they're made; and because that's how they're made, that's how they choose to act. Freely. In accordance with their own nature. And sure, that nature was created by someone who knew darn well what the inevitable results would be—but so what? It's not like God can not know what he's doing, is it? He knows what kind of person he's making. He knows what situations they'll encounter throughout their lifetime. And he knows how they'll respond because of the way he made them.
But they still do all their own choosing. He doesn't make the choices for them. He doesn't have to: that's already all set up. Because you are who you are, you will make the choices you make. They're not made for you. You're made to make them. And you will. All by yourself.
What's freer?
@DarrenWalker 👍
To have a choice and the right to exercise that choice when they want to. I don’t think another persons freewill can be taken away unless paralyzed or dead. Choice is always there like breathing. Others may try to limit another’s free will psychologically or physically but the person can still say, do, think whatever but not at the extent that they may wish...Consequences could cause limitations and make others feel like they can’t do something but again that is their choice they do have the free will to choose otherwise but then deal with the consequences..... Consequences could be dire despite that people have still snuck out of their bedroom windows after bedtime to go somewhere they probably should not be; in third world countries some steal knowing penalty is to loose a limb, some are out and gay despite that they would be scorned, ostracized, or killed. To choose and the ability to exercise it is freewill. Even to not choose is freewill. To what EXTENT that you have the choice and the ability to exercise it becomes a matter of standard of living or surviving.
*These were my first thoughts without looking up anything. I read only the first post. I wanted to express myself and then see if other post would change my mind about anything. My mind is just processing, processing...
🤔Processing, processing, .... only way to not give a person(s) freewill is to keep them throughly and completely ignorant? But then as human beings we create from nothing and build on that. Lol I almost made myself cry... a person would literally have to live out their lives in a box with no new information. 🤔Even that is not an absolute because If that was the situation their body would provide them with information. Body hurts, ache, menstruate, itch, grow, or wants from som nutritional lack. Okay...they would be able to choose to react or not react even though they may not understand. That is freewill still. Lack of options is still a matter of standard of living, surviving, or defining quality of life.
Exsanguinate, that was fun and now I will read everybody else’s👍🏽
Why! Why Mr Anderson, Why do you persist!?
Because I chose to!
To those who are of the opinion that free will does not exist, can you explain how that manifests in your life experience? What is making you think a thought or do a task if it is not your free will to do so? Who is steering your ship? A chemical process in your brain under which you have no control? I believe in free will. Can you offer anything to change my mind?