Does Man Have Free Will?

[StormLogic]

The human brain is the most misunderstood organ in the body. Bigger is not always more intelligent.

The argument presented by Pendragon appeared to be that if determinism were true, everyone would act like clones - a counter-argument is that this assumes everyone is being acted on by identical causes (i.e. has an identical brain).

[Scheherazade]

Please do not personalise your arguments.

If you do not like a poster's arguments, wordings and/or style, feel free to ignore them.

[Pendragon]

As I said, "Have a nice day." Pointless arguments do no one any good. If the good Doctor will accept my apology for any misunderstandings, I am certain I will not bother anyone further.

[quasimodo1]

Dear Pen: It seems to me that when religion gets on a forum, objectivity and openmindedness go off. I'm sure that i've upset more than one deist or believer, very few of whom seem to be able to comprehend spirituality without need of deity. There's no oxymoron there. quasimodo1

[Redzeppelin]

Determinism does not negate the idea that our expressions can contain truth. The term refers to the idea that everything is causally determined based on the preceeding laws. Anything but that is speculation. Whether or not you truly consider facts at hand anymore, it will have been causally determined to be that way.

My understanding of determinism is pretty simple, so I may be saying stupid things here, but I understand determinism to mean that choice is a determined by some force or influence in my life - not my will. Granted: many things may influence our choices, but determinism suggests that the choice was not mine, but the processes that surround me.

This was interesting, I will give you credit. How the mind works biochemically and the conscious appraisal and reasoning are very similar. The conscious appraisal and reasoning is merely the result of biochemistry and ultimately physics which my brain uses during its lifetime. Ultimately everything is a bunch of energy moving around, so you could say that we don't really know anything; there's only one substance and thus no comparison.

Thank you. Lewis articulates my belief much better than I can: if our perception of how the world is is merely a function of how our brain works and not a conscious, freely chosen inference, then we can know nothing.

How does one empirically arrive at something by mathematical means?

I should have written "by empirical or mathematical means."

Math is not what reality is founded upon, it's the predictible way it behaves, and it isn't used to tell people how truthful a post is. Anything dealing with quantities is pretty much mathematics, or can be mathematically shown. My posts are from determined biochemical processes in my brain, and to say that "I" have no control over it is pretty arbitrary when the pronoun refers to something which is not different than anything else.

Going metaphysical on me doesn't change the fact that you just admitted that your thoughts were the product of determined biochemical processes; as such, they can hold no true validity because you weren't in charge of those ideas.

The use of language very much kills the ability to see things as they are. You know separate words for different objects, how they move and how you feel, but its under the false pretense that they are about separate things. All matter is a form of energy (or substance) and it shifts, as it were. What you refer to as you is in fact no different.

But we have to use language to communicate. Just because all matter may be a form of energy doesn't make all matter identical. A tree and a guitar are both made of wood, but they function quite differently and are separate things.

God is Omniscient - there is "no may". God knows the future already. Even the "prayers of good people" so there is no need to alter the future. If he needed to do that then he is not omnisicient - hence contradictory.

This presupposes the idea that the future exists to be known. Does it? How do you know?

Show me how Characters in a novel make choices. Remember everything that will happen is already written down in a book by God.

Still on the novel analogy, huh? That one doesn't work because we are real and the characters in a novel aren't; we exist and have been given an independent physical, psychological and moral reality that characters of a novel (imaginative creations) do not. They're not the same - at least in the way you're trying to connect them.

[Mr. Dr. Ralph]

I think I've stated my point well enough to leave things more or less as they are. The concept of the self, what you call you, must be completely illusory. To state that "you choose something" does not follow because there is only one thing; you're comprised of atoms and they are concentrated energy, and perceived changes are only a result of its kinetic manifestation. Any mention of the soul or afterlife is an appeal to the imagination and not grounded.

All that is (matter and its movement) is fundamentally identical, the differences appear as a result of our ignorance of this fact. I don't like it anymore than you do, but at the same time this is the only way things can be.

[Redzeppelin]

I think I've stated my point well enough to leave things more or less as they are. The concept of the self, what you call you, must be completely illusory. To state that "you choose something" does not follow because there is only one thing; you're comprised of atoms and they are concentrated energy, and perceived changes are only a result of its kinetic manifestation. Any mention of the soul or afterlife is an appeal to the imagination and not grounded.

All that is (matter and its movement) is fundamentally identical, the differences appear as a result of our ignorance of this fact. I don't like it anymore than you do, but at the same time this is the only way things can be.

Our fundamental difference appears to be our foundational philosophies: I believe I am a divinely created creature and was given the gift of free will; your comments suggest that you are a naturalist and view life as only material in nature. If this is so, then that would adequately explain our differing positions.

[BibliophileTRJ]

Yes, man does have free will........that is, of course, until he gets married.

[Redzeppelin]

Yes, man does have free will........that is, of course, until he gets married.

I figured that was a given...

[StormLogic]

Did you get the PM I sent you, Mr. Dr. Ralph?

[Night Closet]

yes MAN has afree well
according to many religions " isalm, christianity, and the jews" , Man has got the absolute free well, and freedom to choose

Thomas Aquinas, " the scholastic philosopher", proved thaT God has the absolute knowledge of MAN's attitudes and plans , but as the known God do not interfer in Man's choice so Man bears the bearings of his choices

THE Night Closet

[ELizabeth McC]

yes MAN has afree well

But is there any water in it?

My humble apologies

Yes, man does have free will........that is, of course, until he gets married.

I figured that was a given...

May I refer both you chaps to the "Will feminism dismantle patriarchy" thread... You need to spend more time there

[billyjack]

in the dualistic terminology of the english language "free will" does indeed exist. but we probably shouldnt take the rules of english grammar to be synonymous with the patterns of the universe.

[Pendragon]

Our fundamental difference appears to be our foundational philosophies:

I know, I said I wouldn't bother people. Forgive me, please.

Guys, you may not have noticed, but this is the Religious Section, not the Philosophical Section. The question of free will therefore should be approached from the religious standpoint. If one wishes to discuss the philosophical implications of the thought, why not start a thread on the Philosophy Section?

Free will as it applies to Religion is thus: Does God hold the fate of man, or can man choose his own fate? Will a man's choices be in the end what saves or dooms him? I suggest reading Ezekiel chapter 18 and chapter 33, and the last chapter of Revelation. These scriptures clearly point out that a man's choice will be his salvation or doom.

God Bless.

Pen.

[linz]

I do not believe in free will, it seems to me that a person must be all knowing in order to act absolutely. If a person does wrong regularly from not knowing of God or his consequences, the only thing he can be held absolutely in contempt of is being foolish. The Lord said 'they are like us now' when Adam and Eve sinned. I'm guessing from Job that 'us' means God and Satan, but this still doesn't justify the idea of human will. If your a goat or a sheep you can't help but be one or the other. You are what you are.