Limited Free Will?

[Redratio1]

Basically we all have a notion that we have at least some free will.

However, I think we sometimes overestimate how much free will we have.

Concepts of things which limit our free will:

Behavioral:

- Genetics
- Chemical balances
- Evolution
- Emotion
- Behaviorism
- Upbringing
- Culture
- Taboos
- Laws
- Duty
- Disease
- Environment
- Psychological make up

Collectively:

- Group behavior
- Natural creation of higher units of organization
- Group think
- Forces of nature (disasters, climate change)
- Culture
- Evolution of group dynamics

Of course there is plenty of evidence for freewill, which boils down to knowledge of what forces make you make certain decisions. When knowing those forces and either choosing to go with them or act outside its natural outcome is what gives you freewill. Otherwise free will is speculation at best. If you restrict the arguement to freewill as being able to make decisions at ALL, then you must also realize it as merely a random series of 1s and 0s-- yes and no for decisions. Hardly fits a true definition of freewill in my opinion.

[Plato]

My sense that I have free will, and am not a process of chemical and physical reactions, is what convinces me of the Divine. What exactly that is is a more difficult question. I know that chemical and physical reactions have a lot to do with the way that I think and behave, nut ultimately I believe intuitively in the "self", which being metaphysical, therefore must exist in a supernatural world. :angel:

When I say to atheists that they merely believe themselves to be a set of chemical and physical reactions, they get quite annoyed with me :touche:

[Smurf]

When I say to atheists that they merely believe themselves to be a set of chemical and physical reactions, they get quite annoyed with me
That's exactly what I believe.

[Redratio1]

When I say to atheists that they merely believe themselves to be a set of chemical and physical reactions, they get quite annoyed with me

Because it is not an emperical reasoning it is a leap of faith.

Many of our mental pathologies are linked to defects in the brain, disease, or chemical imbalances. Insanity used to be thought of a being possessed by demons. Good thing we figured that one out.

[Plato]

Because it is not an emperical reasoning it is a leap of faith.

Many of our mental pathologies are linked to defects in the brain, disease, or chemical imbalances. Insanity used to be thought of a being possessed by demons. Good thing we figured that one out.

To me religion is intuitive (or faith based if you like). That is an argument both for and against it. I have no other way of trying to share my intuition other than differentiating it from the chemical reaction description. Rationally however, it is difficult to demonstrate that we are anything other than a chemical reaction. :eek:

[Smurf]

To me religion is intuitive (or faith based if you like). That is an argument both for and against it.
True, when one is only concerned with the existence of a God (or lack thereof). But when discussing religion as a whole such as morals and rules and worship, one can rationalize quite a bit.

Take for example christianity. They have faith that there is a god, and then they have faith that they know what he wants them to do and then they have faith that if they don't do it this will happen to them after death (so on and so forth).
Rationalizing that we know so very little (almost nothing) about the Universe, I can argue that even if a god does exist, we humans with our limited knowledge of the Universe will be completely incapable of beginning to understand the will of God, therefor believing so is a giant leap in faith, while not believing so is rationalized.

[xexon]

You have free will, but you still are subject to old and new karmic debts. They determine what events in your life will come to pass. Old debt must be paid for. You have no choice in the matter. You can delay it, but not avoid it.

The trick is not to create any new negative karma, which binds you to this world.




x

[Redratio1]

Basically what I am saying is the only time you express freewill is when you realize what forces motivate you. Then you can either choose to go with those forces, or go against those forces. Thats freewill. Otherwise we really are on auto-pilot, with limited freewill awareness.

[Antipathy]

To me religion is intuitive (or faith based if you like). That is an argument both for and against it. I have no other way of trying to share my intuition other than differentiating it from the chemical reaction description. Rationally however, it is difficult to demonstrate that we are anything other than a chemical reaction. :eek:
Intuition is a part of self awareness and self preservation. There's nothing supernatural about it. I mean... even the dumbest animals intuitively know when they are in danger. Do you think there is a devine influence on every single one of the billions living creatures on earth?

[Larani]

Basically what I am saying is the only time you express freewill is when you realize what forces motivate you. Then you can either choose to go with those forces, or go against those forces. Thats freewill. Otherwise we really are on auto-pilot, with limited freewill awareness.

Red I hear what your saying and I Hear what Xenon is saying. To me I tend to put it down to maturity. for no other purpose because well it seems right.

A child who screams for his mother does so on instinct he is hungry and the mind sends signals to the brain that his body is in need of substance and then new signals are formed to open the mouth and let out the preverbal scream. At this stage there truly is no self control it is more a autonomic function like breathing or a release of the bladder.

As this baby matures however as it becomes more a self then simply a set of autonomic functions going on and off. That is when I think free will as we know it kicks in. Part is understanding of ourselves and the other part is in understanding ourselves inside the greater being (universe) that we exist.

I think the penultimate understanding of free will and the utter release from the very bonds itself away from the forces you mentioned which indeed are as relevant as the forces of Gravity is upon the earth is what it means to be truly free and to truly have free will. It is the absolute knowledge that one can indeed go against the very forces of the universe itself such as self preservation That which earlier drove the babies cries and choose to do otherwise.

[Antipathy]

Basically what I am saying is the only time you express freewill is when you realize what forces motivate you. Then you can either choose to go with those forces, or go against those forces. Thats freewill. Otherwise we really are on auto-pilot, with limited freewill awareness.
Whilst I agree that all the forces you listed earlier are motivating us, I wouldn't necessarily come to the conclusion that they are working 'against' us. We are social creatures and society has rules. If we want to remain a part of society we have to conform to some extent or we will be rejected. And rejection is probably the most crushing emotion that a social animal can endure.

So I would say that free will is limited. But only because it is difficult, if not self harming, to go against our natural behaviour.

[Redratio1]

Red I hear what your saying and I Hear what Xenon is saying. To me I tend to put it down to maturity. for no other purpose because well it seems right.

A child who screams for his mother does so on instinct he is hungry and the mind sends signals to the brain that his body is in need of substance and then new signals are formed to open the mouth and let out the preverbal scream. At this stage there truly is no self control it is more a autonomic function like breathing or a release of the bladder.

As this baby matures however as it becomes more a self then simply a set of autonomic functions going on and off. That is when I think free will as we know it kicks in. Part is understanding of ourselves and the other part is in understanding ourselves inside the greater being (universe) that we exist.

I think the penultimate understanding of free will and the utter release from the very bonds itself away from the forces you mentioned which indeed are as relevant as the forces of Gravity is upon the earth is what it means to be truly free and to truly have free will. It is the absolute knowledge that one can indeed go against the very forces of the universe itself such as self preservation That which earlier drove the babies cries and choose to do otherwise.

Right, exactly.

I wonder if bands, to city-states, to kingdoms, to nation-states, to unions and the progress of science is a manifestation of human civilization become more freewilled, and self aware.

I found that Copernicus's discovery of the helocentric universe, the moon landings, World Wars, Cold War, and the Ozone Treaty were all steps toward humankind self-awareness and freewill as we have defined it. Even religion has played a role in unifying political aggregrates. However I find religion a way of soothing the randomness of the 1s and 0s, the random yes's and no's of decisions. It give order to the chaos of the otherwise freewill-less existence of a person.

[Redratio1]

Whilst I agree that all the forces you listed earlier are motivating us, I wouldn't necessarily come to the conclusion that they are working 'against' us. We are social creatures and society has rules. If we want to remain a part of society we have to conform to some extent or we will be rejected. And rejection is probably the most crushing emotion that a social animal can endure.


Well thats why I said "with the forces" first.

So I would say that free will is limited. But only because it is difficult, if not self harming, to go against our natural behaviour.

It is not going against your natural behavior that is the point. The point is to recognize the forces that produce your behavior, and either act with those forces, or against those forces.

It is the understanding of what compels you to decide and knowing when you have to make a decision that makes you truely a freewilled person.

[Larani]

Right, exactly.

I wonder if bands, to city-states, to kingdoms, to nation-states, to unions and the progress of science is a manifestation of human civilization become more freewilled, and self aware.

I found that Copernicus's discovery of the helocentric universe, the moon landings, World Wars, Cold War, and the Ozone Treaty were all steps toward humankind self-awareness and freewill as we have defined it. Even religion has played a role in unifying political aggregrates. However I find religion a way of soothing the randomness of the 1s and 0s, the random yes's and no's of decisions. It give order to the chaos of the otherwise freewill-less existence of a person.

Well its does indeed depend on how one views the universe doesn't it and your right ones views do indeed get limited by external outside forces.

If you see Humanity as say an evolving biochemical machine learning from its past mistakes and making other choices that are different then the last choices made then I suppose we would indeed be evolving not only physically but our mental biochemical processes one would think must evolve too

I once read that massive breakthroughs in sociology don't take place until such a time as the proper momentum is reached such as 51% of the society excepts the breakthrough as truth and thus from their it just kind of snowballs.

Do I think the acknowledgment of free will helps this advancement while of course but I also know that like the maturing baby no matter how much I would want us to grow up today, time.. awfully painfully slow time will be needed for that next big massive breakthrough and lets not forget we can just as easily go backwards to relearn that which was forgotten it happens that is why we say History repeats itself. while some of us just sit shacking our head in amazment.

[Antipathy]

I'm not sure that recognising what the forces are have much to do with it. Behaving in a manner which is socially acceptable isn't a conscious decision for most people. It's like language, only a select few understand all the nuances, but that doesn't stop the rest of us from using it to good effect.

[Redratio1]

awfully painfully slow time will be needed for that next big massive breakthrough and lets not forget we can just as easily go backwards to relearn that which was forgotten it happens that is why we say History repeats itself. while some of us just sit shacking our head in amazment.

Which is the essential truth. That we muddle about in the dark as toothless non-freewilled people in the begining. At birth, and in our civilization's histories.

I wonder how long it will take to learn how to be truely freewilled as a species, after learning that we are a global force, and can destroy the planet. It takes dispassionate people to raft good policy for any country. Often the motivation at totally clear, but secondarily not looking at the reasons for the decisions. Is it motivated by forces unknown, or does the actor even cares, or know that he is supposed to care?

[Larani]

I'm not sure that recognising what the forces are have much to do with it. Behaving in a manner which is socially acceptable isn't a conscious decision for most people. It's like language, only a select few understand all the nuances, but that doesn't stop the rest of us from using it to good effect.

Antipathy socially acceptable is one of those forces remember a time when it was socially acceptable to own slaves and to beat them and handle them like domestic animals. You see only the strongest and most free willed person could stand up against those forces weaker people never would.

Tell me If I put a gun to your head and gave you a choice to either eat a bullet or Rape a women which would you choose? If you conscious of your free will I think you would eat the bullet if not I think you would do it and I get the blame for it.

[Redratio1]

I'm not sure that recognising what the forces are have much to do with it. Behaving in a manner which is socially acceptable isn't a conscious decision for most people. It's like language, only a select few understand all the nuances, but that doesn't stop the rest of us from using it to good effect.

Right, you are behaving in the cultural norm. Without knowing the under pinning of the cultural norm, or its influence on your actions, you cannot be considered freewilled.

Think about this:
You can choose fruit A or fruit B.
You recognize fruit A as being bright, plump, and yummy.
You look at fruit B and it looks old.
You are wire physically to see bright plump fruit as yummy.
You don't know that fruit A is poisonous.
You don't know that B looks bad so you will not eat it.
You don't know fruit B is yummy.
You eat fruit A.

Were you freewilled?

[Redratio1]

Antipathy socially acceptable is one of those forces remeber a time when it was socially acceptable to own slaves and to beat them and handle them like domestic animals. You see only the strongest and most free willed person could stand up against those forces weaker people never would.

Tell me If I put a gun to your head and gave you a choice to either eat a bullet or Rape a women which would you choose? If you concious of your free will I think you would eat the bullet if not I think you would do it and I get the blame for it.

Thats why we love revolutionaries. They break out of the non-freewilled norm, and re-assess their assumptions.

[Antipathy]

Antipathy socially acceptable is one of those forces remeber a time when it was socially acceptable to own slaves and to beat them and handle them like domestic animals. You see only the strongest and most free willed person could stand up against those forces weaker people never would.No I don't remember when it was socially acceptable to own slaves. But maybe I'm not as old as you Larani. :)

But seriously... social acceptability, like culture, is an evolving entity. I don't see how choosing to stand against something you see as unacceptable is more of an act of free will than deciding that it is ok.

Tell me If I put a gun to your head and gave you a choice to either eat a bullet or Rape a women which would you choose? If you concious of your free will I think you would eat the bullet if not I think you would do it and I get the blame for it.Again, you seem to be equating free will to doing the right thing by other people. I believe it is possible to be an evil person and still excercise free will.

[Larani]

Right, you are behaving in the cultural norm. Without knowing the under pinning of the cultural norm, or its influence on your actions, you cannot be considered freewilled.

Think about this:
You can choose fruit A or fruit B.
You recognize fruit A as being bright, plump, and yummy.
You look at fruit B and it looks old.
You are wire physically to see bright plump fruit as yummy.
You don't know that fruit A is poisonous.
You don't know that B looks bad so you will not eat it.
You don't know fruit B is yummy.
You eat fruit A.

Were you freewilled?

While its true we are indeed conditioned I think the above is not that good of a example of freewill. The person in this example will indeed choose that which appears the best possible choice and in so doing will teach others it wasn't such a good choice to begin with.

Its kind of like lying If I choose to lie to you then I by default distort your future choices. Now I may be doing this out of ignorance I might not really know the truth and thus I am really not lying but if I know the truth and I lie then I really am talking your free will choice away from you.l

This is what spouses do when they cheat by not telling or worse actually lying about it they keep the other spouse from making a choice they don't want them making ie leaving. though its possible the spouse may not even care in fact the spouse may be delighted to get the other spouse of their sexual back so to speak but as we have already mention such actions on the part of the cheated spouse wouldn't be socially acceptable and thus not likely that she/he will make that choice.

[Redratio1]

While its true we are indeed conditioned I think the above is not that good of a example of freewill. The person in this example will indeed choose that which appears the best possible choice and in so doing will teach others it wasn't such a good choice to begin with. .

Well it does show that there are degrees of freewill.

Perhaps you always will never have all the facts, so you decide on facts available, and that is all we should expect out of freewill.

On the otherhand, there are people who make great decisions, that shown they have taken in all avaiable analysis and have made a decision. I suppose that is why people confide in each other.

I guess the bottom line might be the intent to understand and capacity to understand the forces at work in making your decision is the mark of freewill.

[Antipathy]

Right, you are behaving in the cultural norm. Without knowing the under pinning of the cultural norm, or its influence on your actions, you cannot be considered freewilled.

Think about this:
You can choose fruit A or fruit B.
You recognize fruit A as being bright, plump, and yummy.
You look at fruit B and it looks old.
You are wire physically to see bright plump fruit as yummy.
You don't know that fruit A is poisonous.
You don't know that B looks bad so you will not eat it.
You don't know fruit B is yummy.
You eat fruit A.

Were you freewilled?
I think I see what you're getting at. We can't always trust what we believe is the right thing to do when making decisions. But just because we aren't aware of all the facts doesn't mean we have no free will.

[Antipathy]

I guess the bottom line might be the intent to understand and capacity to understand the forces at work in making your decision is the mark of freewill.
So simpletons have no free will then?

[Larani]

No I don't remember when it was socially acceptable to own slaves. But maybe I'm not as old as you Larani. :)

Oh I just knew you were a young’en . :D


But seriously... social acceptability, like culture, is an evolving entity. I don't see how choosing to stand against something you see as unacceptable is more of an act of free will than deciding that it is ok.

It is indeed more of a act of free-will because it goes against self preservation and social acceptability you will likely be shunned spurned ridiculed you will be a outcast thus to recognize the power of ones free will, their self as it were and go against the mighty society is to indeed not only stand alone but to stand truly free outside it bonds.


Again, you seem to be equating free will to doing the right thing by other people. I believe it is possible to be an evil person and still excercise free will.

Of course it is many people do evil and do it knowingly but most do it either by projecting their actions choices onto someone or something esle, or they truly are in the dark and thus do not know what they are doing is a evil thing. People who lack empathy for example because they have no concept of what empathy is because they have never seen it do horrible things to people and we are indeed utterly shocked by their actions but it is their lack or empathy that in a nutshell has made them a non-social creature as we tend to understand social creatures.

[Simba]

Free will?

That depends on how much I have had to drink. Hold tightly to your wives the more I do.

Haha!

[Redratio1]

So simpletons have no free will then?

Good question. I'd have to say no they have freewill. Because each of us deals with their own capacity to understand the forces at work, and the available knowledge.

If I came back from the future 2000 years in the future. I would probably be a little smarter than the average smart person, but have a huge amount of data, on what make us tick.

Also, an Alien just meeting us would probably have a huge amount of computing and science to back them up, but would be useless on cultural nuances, thus being poorly freewilled.

[Antipathy]

Oh I just knew you were a young’en . :D Hehe, I wish! :)


It is indeed more of a act of free-will because it goes against self preservation and social acceptability you will likely be shunned spurned ridiculed you will be a outcast thus to recognize the power of ones free will, their self as it were and go against the mighty society is to indeed not only stand alone but to stand truly free outside it bonds. I can cite many incidents, from my personal experiences, where someone I know has gone with the flow of events; even though, deep in their hearts they know that what they are doing is wrong. They excercised their free will to do the 'easy' thing rather than the 'right' thing... still free will.

[Larani]

So simpletons have no free will then?

While they do indeed have free will it is truly limited think of a young child 3 or 4 years old still bound heavily to the forces of automatic reflexes and instinct.

As I said true free will comes with the knowledge of free will and that takes time and development put anything in the way of that development and true free will gets derailed.

[Larani]

Hehe, I wish! :)
I can cite many incidents, from my personal experiences, where someone I know has gone with the flow of events; even though, deep in their hearts they know that what they are doing is wrong. They excercised their free will to do the 'easy' thing rather than the 'right' thing... still free will.

True or maybe just maybe in reality they didn't think it was wrong at all but it wasn't socially acceptable and thus they chose only to give the impression that they thought it was wrong for appearances sake and thus again gain acceptability.

[Antipathy]

Good question. I'd have to say no. Because each of us deals with their own capacity to understand the forces at work, and the available knowledge.

If I came back from the future 2000 years in the future. I would probably be a little smarter than the average smart person, but have a huge amount of data, on what make us tick.

Also, an Alien just meeting us would probably have a huge amount of computing and science to back them up, but would be useless on cultural nuances, thus being poorly freewilled.
I disagree. Being better informed allows you to make better decisions for sure, but the fact that you still have a decision to make... and make it, is all there is to free will. Get two people of similar intelligence and near identical education to write a simple essay on a specific subject and their essays will more often than not be entirely different whilst conveying the same message. If they didn't have free will, the essays would be nearly identical.

[Smurf]

I can cite many incidents, from my personal experiences, where someone I know has gone with the flow of events; even though, deep in their hearts they know that what they are doing is wrong. They excercised their free will to do the 'easy' thing rather than the 'right' thing... still free will.
Ever heard of the Milgram Experiment (http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm)?
This teaches us a valuable lesson about the forces that determine how a person acts, I do not believe any human in its current form has true free will, as there will always be a force that wins out which is what you make your decision on.

[Redratio1]

True or maybe just maybe in reality they didn't think it was wrong at all but it wasn't socially acceptable and thus they chose only to give the impression that they thought it was wrong for appearances sake and thus again gain acceptability.

Our entire system of justice is based upon the idea of freewill. The ideas of capacity to make informed decisions, and the knowledge enough to make informed decisions.

The insane vs. the sane. A person is insane if he cannot tell the difference between right and wrong. However, this is decided by the science at the time, the experience of the psychologists, and the qualifications of the the lawyers.

[Redratio1]

I disagree. Being better informed allows you to make better decisions for sure, but the fact that you still have a decision to make... and make it, is all there is to free will. Get two people of similar intelligence and near identical education to write a simple essay on a specific subject and their essays will more often than not be entirely different whilst conveying the same message. If they didn't have free will, the essays would be nearly identical.

But they convey the same thing....

Have you been around identical twins for a long period of time? It is truely strange to hear then finish each other's sentences, and say thing simutaniously so as to give a nice stereo effect.

[Antipathy]

True or maybe just maybe in reality they didn't think it was wrong at all but it wasn't socially acceptable and thus they chose only to give the impression that they thought it was wrong for appearances sake and thus again gain acceptability.
"They chose". However much you want to link free will to empathy, there is always a choice. I understand what you're saying, but I think you need another term to describe it. Laziness or lack of energy to resist is probably the greatest thorn in the side of decision making. But it's still decision making and therefore free will.

[Smurf]

Freewill does not exist, because everything any decision is based upon is will be pre-programmed reasoning and knowledge.

[Larani]

Ever heard of the Milgram Experiment (http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm)?
This teaches us a valuable lesson about the forces that determine how a person acts, I do not believe any human in its current form has true free will, as there will always be a force that wins out which is what you make your decision on.

This was indeed a good study but you will note it wasn't 100% effective meaning not all students allow their free will to be subjected to the will of the authority because and I think simply put those individuals though small as they might be knew their free will was just that and it couldn't be transfered to the Instructor just because the instructor said so. They knew they had a part to play in it no matter what and thus chose not too.

I think though too that Human beings really do kind of fit on a bell curve in most situations like this some would have known they had free will to oppose and yet gladly allowed the Instructor to take the heat while they let the subject have it and on the otherside would be those that would have opposed the authority no matter what.

[Redratio1]

"They chose". However much you want to link free will to empathy, there is always a choice. I understand what you're saying, but I think you need another term to describe it. Laziness or lack of energy to resist is probably the greatest thorn in the side of decision making. But it's still decision making and therefore free will.

No, I see lack of understanding is the main halter of freewill. It immediately makes people go into defense mode. If the defense mode is what you were looking for then you would be indeed a freewill master. AKA a propaganda master!

[Smurf]

Morality is just as much a pre-programmed reasoning as anything else

[Larani]

Freewill does not exist, because everything any decision is based upon is will be pre-programmed reasoning and knowledge.

And if you know that then what do you have? and more importantly what do you choose to do with it.

[Larani]

"They chose". However much you want to link free will to empathy, there is always a choice. I understand what you're saying, but I think you need another term to describe it. Laziness or lack of energy to resist is probably the greatest thorn in the side of decision making. But it's still decision making and therefore free will.

Oh I wasn't trying to say they didn't choose. We all make choices the unknown factor is always are we aware why were making them.

[Redratio1]

This teaches us a valuable lesson about the forces that determine how a person acts, I do not believe any human in its current form has true free will, as there will always be a force that wins out which is what you make your decision on.

Yes, but there is never a case where all the unknowns are known. If all the unknowns were knowns then you would be nothing more than a computer. 1s for yes, and 0s for no.

So, perfect knowledge is not freewill. It is imperfect knowledge, and the ability to make to wrong choice that makes up freewill.

[Larani]

Yes, but there is never a case where all the unknowns are known. If all the unknowns were knowns then you would be nothing more than a computer. 1s for yes, and 0s for no.

So, perfect knowledge is not freewill. It is imperfect knowledge, and the ability to make to wrong choice that makes up freewill.

Maybe you are Maybe some universal programmer is out there right now writing code as we speak and this is all just some crazy illusion or Matrix if you will. In fact did I freely choose to write this or was this just what the programmer wanted me to write? :lol:

Talk about outside influences eh.

[Redratio1]

Another question is,..if I were to know everything about you, and used you against your own people. How do you know that I do not have every knowledge of your species. I could lead you around like a pig, with treasures, and eat you when I felt hungery.

[Antipathy]

I see lack of understanding is the main halter of freewill.
perfect knowledge is not freewill. It is imperfect knowledge, and the ability to make to wrong choice that makes up freewill.

Ineresting turn around there RR. :D

But it's just as flawed in my view. Knowledge, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with free will. I would venture that all creatures, from humans down to insects, behave the way they do predominantly because they want to. Sure, their evolutionary paths may have made them predisposed to that behaviour for survival purposes. But within the confines of what they need to do to survive, they all still excersize free will.

[Smurf]

Freewill, in our stage of human evolution, can only be achieved by complete and total lack of knowledge. If you believe any single thing to be true, you're conciousness will be corrupted by that single belief.

[Redratio1]

Ineresting turn around there RR. :D

But it's just as flawed in my view. Knowledge, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with free will. I would venture that all creatures, from humans down to insects, behave the way they do predominantly because they want to. Sure, their evolutionary paths may have made them predisposed to that behaviour for survival purposes. But within the confines of what they need to do to survive, they all still excersize free will.

It is the knowledge and the lack of knowledge that determines the level of freewill thought. Total lack of knowledge is like a chemotroph (chemical seeker) a cell only knowing he is drawn to a chemical. Total lack of capacity is like a plant or more specifically a vine. It will always seek the path of least resistance and best survival...

[Redratio1]

Freewill, in our stage of human evolution, can only be achieved by complete and total lack of knowledge. If you believe any single thing to be true, you're conciousness will be corrupted by that single belief.

Very Zen, however we must exist in the plane that holds the most promise to the next generation.

[Antipathy]

You're right! I have no free will. I want to stay and continue this debate, but it's 4 hours past my bedtime and I have to sleep. :(

Or I could stay awake and feel like crap for the next two days... what to do? What to do?

Night All. :sleep: :)

[Redratio1]

You're right! I have no free will. I want to stay and continue this debate, but it's 4 hours past my bedtime and I have to sleep. :(

Or I could stay awake and feel like crap for the next two days... what to do? What to do?

Night All. :sleep: :)

No, no, you just have imperfect freewill, and ideas that are drawn from disturbing pats of Japanese history.

[Larani]

Freewill, in our stage of human evolution, can only be achieved by complete and total lack of knowledge. If you believe any single thing to be true, you're conciousness will be corrupted by that single belief.

Oh I am not going to choose to believe that rubbish as it might corrupt my conciousness :lol:

[Smurf]

thats not saying that knowledge is evil in any way, simply saying that Free Will does not exist because there will always be forces, and when faced with a decision between two directions the stronger forces will win out, only when there are no forces can one be truely 'free' in making a decision.
So, maybe having freewill would be more of a vice than a virtue as you'd never be able to make an informed decision? eh? eh?

[Larani]

thats not saying that knowledge is evil in any way, simply saying that Free Will does not exist because there will always be forces, and when faced with a decision between two directions the stronger forces will win out, only when there are no forces can one be truely 'free' in making a decision.
So, maybe having freewill would be more of a vice than a virtue as you'd never be able to make an informed decision? eh? eh?

I think we all can accept that some external forces are natural like say Gravity and or Hunger and thus as external forces we are limited on how we will choose to allow them to effect us, but to have the knowledge of external forces does indeed give one the power and the options of free will to negate many.

So while I accept a certain kernal of truth in what you say I disagree that the strongest will win out becuase sometimes the strongest force actually comes from within.

[Smurf]

Even if the strongest force comes from within it will not be completely straight. It would have been pushed in this direction and pushed in that direction by the mind, and in the end it will be corrupt.

Humans (in their current evolutionary stage) are completely incapable of achieving freewill because we are born with certain knowledge already implanted into our mind. The closest a human can come to freewill is by acknowledging that there are forces affecting it, and acknowledging that any decisions he makes are not his own but just his translations of forces working through him. (I know that makes it sound mystical but I mean it in a realist way, the forces are social influences, ect.)

[Larani]

Even if the strongest force comes from within it will not be completely straight. It would have been pushed in this direction and pushed in that direction by the mind, and in the end it will be corrupt.

Humans (in their current evolutionary stage) are completely incapable of achieving freewill because we are born with certain knowledge already implanted into our mind. The closest a human can come to freewill is by acknowledging that there are forces affecting it, and acknowledging that any decisions he makes are not his own but just his translations of forces working through him. (I know that makes it sound mystical but I mean it in a realist way, the forces are social influences, ect.)

Agreed but once an individual does indeed acknowledge such forces then like any known obstacle they can and will (though not always with success) avoid them and to let those forces play no part in their decision making process.

To put it simply enlightenment is a mind free of such earthly constructs and bonds and thus once free is about as free-willed as one could honestly hope to comprehend.

[Smurf]

But is it possible for humans to achieve such enlightenment, even after we aknowledge the proble, it is difficult to throw off predjudices we have become so comfortable living with.

[Larani]

But is it possible for humans to achieve such enlightenment, even after we aknowledge the proble, it is difficult to throw off predjudices we have become so comfortable living with.

Maybe your asking the wrong question. If one knows the external forces that have influenced their predjudices and thus they could choose to denouce them and if one knows they have indeed chosen to harbor those predjudices then maybe the question is

Why does one freely choose to do so?

For me the answer is obvious its simply because they want to. and if one can honestly say so without hiding their true self from the rest of the world then I see no problem with that do you?

[mataj]

Of course there is plenty of evidence for freewill, There can be no evidence for free will, because it's religious, not scientific concept. You are therefore not supposed to search for the evidence for free will. You are supposed to believe it exists.

[Smurf]

Maybe your asking the wrong question. If one knows the external forces that have influenced their predjudices and thus they could choose to denouce them and if one knows they have indeed chosen to harbor those predjudices then maybe the question is

Why does one freely choose to do so?

For me the answer is obvious its simply because they want to. and if one can honestly say so without hiding their true self from the rest of the world then I see no problem with that do you?
We're getting deep here :beer:

I agree with you mostly except I don't know if it is possible for a human to fully recognize everything hampering his free will enough to achieve "true self".
As for why we would freely choose to keep them, because we have grown up with them, they have always been with us and we have become comfortable with them, kind of like the blind man who gets eye surgery and then wants to become blind again because his new sense scares him.
Human have always been afraid of change, and because we are social creatures, especially afraid of change when we are doing it alone.

[Larani]

We're getting deep here :beer:

I agree with you mostly except I don't know if it is possible for a human to fully recognize everything hampering his free will enough to achieve "true self".
As for why we would freely choose to keep them, because we have grown up with them, they have always been with us and we have become comfortable with them, kind of like the blind man who gets eye surgery and then wants to become blind again because his new sense scares him.
Human have always been afraid of change, and because we are social creatures, especially afraid of change when we are doing it alone.


Well I do indeed believe that change is possible but you see that too is a choice isn't it. I could believe it was hopeless and even bring some pretty good evidence to back up my beliefs to try and influence and convince you that its so (external source), but for what purpose? What would my intentions be? To be Right? is that all I am trying to do? Do I know? If I know why I am doing it and more importantly I can explain it to you in great detail then in all likelihood I know the source of my choices. and I freely do indeed choose it I believe in it and I believe it is the right choice. It doesn't matter if it is because to me it will be unless someone can present overwhelming evidence to shatter the sources of my choices. And that is indeed freewill Knowledge that I am making a choice and why I am making it. If I cannot answer those two questions in the equation fully then no I don’t truly have free choice and thusly I ought not be fully responsible for my choices either, a form of greyscale would need to be applied because in reality I am rather as they say insane not knowing right from wrong or why I do what I do.

[DRMIZER]

To me religion is intuitive (or faith based if you like). That is an argument both for and against it. I have no other way of trying to share my intuition other than differentiating it from the chemical reaction description. Rationally however, it is difficult to demonstrate that we are anything other than a chemical reaction. :eek:As the first post indicated. . . . .your faith and intuition is based on all the things he mentioned. . . . . . .I don't think it is something that just clicked in your life.

[Vic]

How much free will is left, when you´re drugged?

If free will would really exist as a non-physical-chemical reaction, then drugs shouldn´t influence a lifeform´s decision.
don´t you think?

for me free will is just a feeling, an ilusion brought to light by our perceptions, experiences and actions.

i mean free will is limited by so many things, but the thing that influences free will the most is "morality".
noone is born with a specific morality, you gain that morality depending on where you grow up and what you experience while aging.
and that morality already influences your so called free will.
i´m pretty sure noone in this forum here will go on a killing spree just for the fun, because it´s against your beliefs and morale.
all your actions always depend on how you think feel and your world view.

so basically we are all slaves to our beliefs. there is not really a free will.

i know some might say this statement is dangerous because it would make criminals seem innocent. But the prosecutor is just as innocent for punishing the criminal as the criminal is for his/her actions.


P.S: Damnit, i somehow oversaw page 4 of this thread. Smurf already pointed out those issues :(

[Mightypixiestic]

This is my first post, so I apologize if it's somewhat off topic.

When it comes to free will, we are predisposed to certain behavioral, Social, etc... personality traits, but we have to take in account our "souls"! I suffer from a chemical imbalance which cause many emotional disturbanceses, however, I CHOOSE to either react to those emotional diturbanceses or not-hencence free will. The "soul" is a combination of our everyday experiences and what the "life-force" has created. I'm trying to explain that one is created a certain way by the all powerful "life-force", but that power allows us to take what is created and change it, make it better, faster, stronger....etc. We create or add to what will at some point become a finshed product. I don't dout my free will, for I will choose to take out of life what I desire too. No matter what is thrown my way, I choose how to take it.

Sometimes I feel others use the excuse of behavioral, social, whatever personality traits to give reasons to themselves for their downfalls. A type of self-delusioning. I know, for I sometimes blame my actions on my chemical imbalance, only because I don't want to believe that I would do some of the wrong I have. I lie to my self. Does any of this make sense :thinking: :(

[JD3]

Yes, yes it does. ;)

[Rivet]

so basically we are all slaves to our beliefs. there is not really a free will.

Beliefs change. And people don't always follow what they believe.

[Spyder]

:confused:

Of course there is plenty of evidence for freewill, which boils down to knowledge of what forces make you make certain decisions. When knowing those forces and either choosing to go with them or act outside its natural outcome is what gives you freewill. Otherwise free will is speculation at best. If you restrict the arguement to freewill as being able to make decisions at ALL, then you must also realize it as merely a random series of 1s and 0s-- yes and no for decisions. Hardly fits a true definition of freewill in my opinion.

I think it's our past that influences our decisions and you are right, once we can act outside of the past - we learn our freewill. We worry about what everyone thinks and says. We make choices - good one and bad ones-- but it's our choice. I just hope i learn from the bad choices (mistakes) and move on. As children we were programmed to think like our parents and grandparents - it's hard to break that trend, so do we ever know what freewill is?

Spyder

[Kong]

I don’t know if free will exists. Perhaps the future already exists and that would kind of negate the free will idea. Reality is a mystery to me. I like to think I have free will but it may be just an illusion.