A topic that came up in another thread: So what does everyone else think about free will? Tommy, yes, if someone/thing did know us well enough to predict our actions we would technically have free will. However it isn't free will because if we knew about what god knew we were going to do, we could change that. It is like the time travel paradox I think. If you build a time machine to travel back in time to change something in your life (and succeed) where did the time machine come from?
As soon as we know what they know, it has changed, but they still know us well enough to be able to figgure out our new actions based on their understanding of us. I believe the future is determined as existance is based on actions and reactions... but I DO NOT think anything can be truely predicted, existance is infinite in detail and greater than anything else, hence the beauty of it.
What IS free will? The ability to enact your own choices? Who doesn't have that? No matter fated or not fated, to each of us individually and even collectively, we are free to enact our own desires. And so the question should not be, "Do we have free will?" Rather, the question should be, "Do we have free desire?" And what is free desire? The ability to desire whatever we want? Does that statement even make sense, as to want something, it must already be a desire? As the argument goes, God is the first cause. But if our desires stem from desire, what was the first desire? Longevity with regards to life, perhaps? Permanence? The Buddha teaches that all things, including life, are impermanent, and certainly Christianity makes no proposition that this is untrue (with the exception of the existance of God, though even heaven did not exist at one point in time so heaven is also impermanent) -- if this is so, can it be said that wisdom or truth can be found via desire? Can it be found by releasing desire?
I was talking about this to cat in another post. My example was to stand still and try to step forward with both feet. You can't -- I mean, you can hop, but you can't really step, whatever stepping is. Cat said you could sort of shimmy...lol You can stand there and debate about what foot to step forward with forever if you want, but eventually you have no choice but to step forward with one foot if you're going to step forward at all. At the very last moment then there is no choice, only action/desire/feeling. Maybe free will is essentially making the choice between being an inanimate object and an animate one. And even on a quantum level...you can't predict where the photon is going to pop up (or whatever)...maybe it acts so unpredictably out of a sudden burst of desire to be animate. The same goes for the process of even thinking out decisions. You have to desire to keep thinking, because you could conceivably just stop and say "All right"...but something keeps you going. So it seems to me that free will and being enslaved to God's will are the exact same thing.
Why can't you step backwards or sidewards? Why can't you sit? Why do you have to step forwards? If the possible choices are going to be limited like that, of course you will be more predictable, the fact is.. in the real world choices are not limited as we live in time.. Even this example has the choice of 'when' you take the step forward. At the very last moment you can still bring your foot back and place it by the other, you still have the choice based on desires. Many people think that you can live without desires, many of the enlightened claim that it is more than possible and infact, advised. It's about finding the true self, the self not effected by the world around us and the self that is truely free to choose. I think I'm missing the point of your post completely, sorry, but it isn't very clear. However - I agree, while having your fate determined by desires, you still have free will.
It doesn't matter how many different choices there seem to be. Even your decision to consider your different options is a choice determined by your desire to make one. All of your thoughts are, I would say...so that essentially there is no difference between free will and the lack thereof. You know what I'm saying? I used the example to dwindle it down to two options, to clarify the situation. You could step in infinite different directions, conceivably, but inevitably you can only make one choice if you're going to make a choice at all. You can't step forward with the right foot and the left foot at once. You can't know exactly 'When' you step forward, as far as a frame of time goes. For example, you don't step forward at 4:30PM, because you step forward at 4:30:30PM. You don't step forward at 4:30:30PM, because you step forward at 4:30:30:30 PM. And so on, infiniti. The only choice you're left with is a vague notion of 'Now', which is controlled by an urge to go. A little bit. Sorry that it's unclear. I don't mean it to be intentionally so. I was missing the point a little myself, because at the very last moment I can see that no distinction can be made between freedom to choose and being enslaved to one's ultimate desires.
It is a tricky thing, free will. I think we have it, or more correctly, the possibility of having it. However, virtually everything about us is conditioned, even our desires in the particular forms we have them are moulded by culture, up-bringing, heredity, and so on. Our thinking processes themselves are confined to the limitations of the particular language or languages in which we think. Myself, I take a view similar to that of some Hindu philosophy, which talks about the need for liberation, a spiritual awakening, self-realization - transcendence. I think it is really only at that point that real freedom of will can come in. But all free will is limited. We can only have it up to a certain extent. Obviously, freedom and power of execution are two different things. It's no use willing that I can fly, for example. We are always going to be limited in our total freedom by physical and biological laws - at least, as long as we are embodied beings. Perhaps total freedom can only come after death.
The problem with Free Will I have is a lot of time my choices suck! LOL I'd be the most crying, moping, depressed and anxious Atheist or Agnostic ever. Now for some people this may not be the case but for me it definitely is. Ever here that saying give someone enough rope to watch them hang themselves? I'm that guy. I need to be steered in my decision making. Now that being said everyone has their choices. To quote Rush,"If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." Even turning your will over to God is in a sense is free will. It's something we are born with. We all have it. So in conclusion once again I've thought so hard my brain hurts. You guys make lurnin' a drag.
Hmm, difficult question. I think we perceive to have free will, but only because we don't really understand the forces at play. If there were a god who supposedly created us, exists beyond time and can thus see the path we take in life I do not think we have free will. You cannot create something, all the programming to go with it, and know what it will be subjected to and then say it has free will. It does not. Are we controlled by the interactions of the particles that compose us? We don't understand all the processes, the interactions in our body and the universe. I suppose if we did it could be possible to predict the future. If we have a destiny would we even know it? without seeing the alternate paths in life how do we know the one that we took wasn't the one we were always going to take.
Just on the subject of free will, there are a few points I'd like to make ... #1) Determinism (the belief that all is causal and that there is no free will) does not mean the world will come crashing down at your feet. No matter how fated, destined, or controlled our futures are, that does not change our feelings and emotions, that does not change who we are, or who we will be. Clocks will keep ticking, cars will keep driving, and the Earth will continue to turn exactly once around its axis every twenty-four hours. Nothing changes EXCEPT our outlook on fate, by believing in determinism. There is no "less emotion" or "less hope" simply because you see it this way. #2) Free will is RELATIVE. When you talk about yourself or others, you are referring to a "being" that is made of forces and matter. This being is relative to everything else. This is perception. The reason why we as humans talk about "I," and "you," and "he she it us they" and all the others, is because our perceptions are limited. They are not broad enough to span the entire universe or beyond that. We do not know every facet of the human being -- we don't know every cause, every action, every reaction, etc. Because of this limit in perception, the question of free will is also relative. We don't know enough about free will to make a factual conclusion about whether or not we have free will (or more accurately, free desire). We have enough evidence to take a good guess but everybody's evidence and perceptions are different, and like many things, belief in free will is a subjective, situational belief, relative to a human being. Now here's the meat and potatoes of the relativity of free will: Because free will is relative, it DOES NOT apply on a universal scale! In other words, what is free will to us is NOT what is free will to God/s. Why? Such a deity, in his infinite perceptive ability and knowledge, can see through the illusory nature of free will and understand the forces at work. Consider it like this ... The human eye sees colours. We see red and green and blue and all the others. What does God see? Can he even see colour? He doesn't have an eye. Nor does he have a "referencing point" in the universe to look from, because he exists everywhere throughout it. God most likely sees light frequencies. He can tell you that the colour we know as "red" is actually photons travelling at a frequency of 430 PHz (430 petahertz, aka 430,000 gigahertz). But does he see "red" the same way we see "red"? The reason we see colours, and not frequency, is because #1 we have a "reference point" somewhere in the universe, where our perceptions are limited. When we interact with light (or vice versa), our senses (in this case our eyes) have limited ability to interact. Our eyes are ALSO seeing photons at 430 PHz, but our eye and brain do not work that fast. Our eyes only see things at roughly 70 Hz. That's plain old hertz. How can you tell this? Mess with the update frequency on your monitor. Above 60 frames per second (or Hz), you get to a point where it no longer makes a visible difference to you how fast your monitor is going, because you can't tell the difference between say 80 Hz and 90 Hz. But God does not have a reference point. He can (supposedly) see where "red" occurs throughout the entire universe, in a mere instant. His perceptions are (supposedly) not limited like our human eyes are, so he can see "red" at its full 430 PHz speed, rather than just at 70-some Hz. So doesn't it make sense that he sees red differently than humans? And doesn't it also make sense that God sees free will differently than humans?
If God also shares our individual experiences then he must see the same colors and experience the same 'free will' as we all do, but then God is obviously not confined to any particular idea of what free will is, so naturally God possesses more freedom than Its individual facets. More freedom to be enslaved to various incorrect perceptions of Itself. But is there such a thing as an 'incorrect perception' when all perceptions are entangled with emotion? We automatically assume that language can reveal truths or we wouldn't speak. But maybe the real fundamental truth isn't what is spoken, but the will with which one speaks. The will doesn't necessarily see red, green, blue, etc.; it just feels these things. It's enslaved and free to feel everything.
Hikaru, I know we probably agree on little philisophically but your grasp of concepts and ability to articulate them at your age amazes me. Again sorry to bring the age into it but at your age my answer to everything was,"Sell weed."
Did you decide to be a baby? Did you decide to be born into this world? Did you decide to have the hunger and experiences that mold what you do? It comes back to the baby question. Did you decide what the universe would be like, or did it pre-exist you? Does the form the universe has determine your interactions with it and other souls (beings) within it? Did your hunger (for power) and attraction to beauty (babies have both of these) come from pre-existing conditions, or did you will them into existence from nothing? Obviously, a baby's hunger (and attraction to beauty) comes from pre existing conditions (or laws). This should solve the whole free will debate. Of course, because people are not in control of what they think, there are many that cannot see that this (contemplation of the baby's perspective) solves the free will debate (the pre-existing condition of their lack of ability to cogitate effectively determines that they cannot understand this simple concept). Bahh. Foolishness rolls like thunder through the minds of the incomplete.
Maybe he knows what our free willed choices are, if he has no influence on them, the will is still free. I don't believe in God but I DO believe the future is predetermined AND my will is free.
I can doubt that. No two things are infinitely similar, thus there is no standard for the number 1 to begin with. Take 'two' apples. On the surface they're roughly the same thing, but on closer examination they are not indentical; nothing we can observe can be said to be. So which one is really the apple? I have absolutely no problem with that. Actually I prefer that everything I do is the will of God. God is also said to be omnipotent, so God can manipulate the past, present, and future to his liking. If he does there's no reason to think that you or I would even be aware of it. In other words God is free, so if you serve only God's will then your will is also free. And since your will is God's will your will is free.
Free will is not defined by the either/or question that you put forward. The problem is the definition of free will that you are defending or attacking. There are two:1 : voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will> 2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention Obviously we make voluntary choices/decisions. Just as obviously, there are prior causes to all the choices that we make (a) the existence of the choice itself and b) our perception (whether right or wrong) of the outcome of selecting either choice being the pertinent prior causes that negate the existence of free will as per the second definition).
