free will

All you have is the moment. Ultimately, you are the sum of all your choices.

 

ok

 

No, I don't buy determinism. I do believe that there are very predictable results for many or most occurrences. But I also believe there are always instances of choice--& those choices can have far-reaching effects. Even seemingly small ones can change the course of history.

Of course I can't prove this any more than someone could prove determinism. I'm convinced that human beings have and make choices quite often. I can't say that any other animal does, but I think it's possible (not moral choices, but other kinds) I'd have to give that possibility a lot more thought for it to be more than a feeling.

I absolutely agree that there are zillions of hidden variables that we can't see or measure, & they powerfully affect occurrences that follow. But even if we knew all those variables, I don't believe we could predict the future 100% of the time. MOST of the time, but not every time.

I believe we can do what would be unexpected even given all the factors that lean in an opposite direction.

This is central to my ethical beliefs & to my paganism. I believe many of those unseen variables are energies of which we're not currently aware in any scientific sense. Even without seeing or understanding them, I believe they can be manipulated--which is essentially what prayer is meant to do. Whether or not there is a god, a person can pray to that god & cause some change in energy that goes on to cause further changes.

It goes against the grain to believe there are no real choices to make. That would necessarily mean that taking responsibility for oneself & one's behavior is essentially meaningless--even if that sense of responsibility is the result of unchangeable causes.

I agree to some extent. I think external causes have powerful effects, but that we make choices over & over all our lives. We are primarily responsible for what becomes of us, what we make of our lives IMO. Our choices are limited, but they are significant.

 

this doesnt make sense to me.

 

Free will is a part of life. That's what seperates human life from inanimate objects. We didn't create the stars and galaxies, but we did create civilization and society by our own free will. I don't believe that God or any supreme being created that outcome, and when you look at the sheer volume of the universe (billions of stars in billions of galaxies), it would be awfully egocentric to presume otherwise.

 

Look at the thread "What happens to the unsaved." All people that has not heard or learned of God and His Word will have the opportunity to convert in the Millennium. God is a fair and just and does not want any of His children to perish. The millennium will begin when Christ returns at the 7th trump and Anti-christ and his allies will be defeated.

Ezekiel 44:23-25 and Rev. 20: 5-6 Speaks of teaching the Word. Many will accept God's Word as the truth and decide to live with God forever.

Jesus when He died on the cross went into Hades and spoke the Word and many going all the way back to Noah converted and Jesus took them out of Hades and they are with Jesus this day.

 

i don't know your stance on evolution, but it seems to me that if you believe in evolution, then you'd have to accept that all animals can make choices or that none can -- unless "free will" evolved in some fashion. but if the ability to be unaffected by natural laws (which is what free will amounts to being) evolved, how did it happen? how do natural laws produce something immune to natural laws?

the problem with this line of thinking -- by that, i mean determinism -- is that people automatically make the leap to "the end" and think of everything as having happened just to get to that point. but there is no "end" and no meaning to anything happening. it just happens and there is only "now".

predicting the future is an interesting adjunct to the theory, but it's really not the thrust of the thing. the only way to know everything about the universe is to have another identical universe. and of course, where would you keep it? aside from the "hidden variables" there is simply too much unhidden data to deal with.

the question is, does the same input yield the same output? all things being equal, do my prayers today do the same thing as my prayers yesterday? does the unseen force sometimes work and sometimes not based purely on factors beyond any ability to manipulate -- ie, are they completely random and without reason?

this is the crux of the issue -- personal responsibility and just how much control people exert in their lives.

in the case of responsibility, one might dismiss the idea of determinism because it would imply that criminals aren't truly guilty of their crimes. but if one accepts the notion of determinism, then the result would be that lawyers and judges and juries would be similarly "released" from the guilt of sentencing somebody who wasn't guilty. the murder is wired to kill, most other people are wired to hate people wired to kill. it simply moves everything over a notch, but nothing really changes.

then you have the question of whether you actually make choices or whether you're just watching a movie. it's a difficult question to tackle. but you can get a sense about the answer based purely on personalities people exhibit. people tend to do the same things over and over. so even the choices they make and affected by the choices they've made before. if there really was free will, then people would be a lot more random, i would think. habits, addictions, predelictions... these imply some internal system guiding the choices we make.

so what gives us the ability to not abide by natural laws? or do you think natural laws include lawlessness (ie, true random)?

 

I don't think I said that very clearly.

Speaking of determinism, you said that if you knew all the variables, you could predict the future.

But I think we can make choices that defy the expectations, even if we do know all the variables (according to natural/physical law) involved. In other words, the workings of a free mind can't be 100% calculated with certainty.

Most aspects of natural law-physics, for example--do not change & are absolutely predictable. What I submit is that the mind is not entirely subject to those unchangeable laws. The mind is not limited to the physical brain. There is some aspect of mind that goes beyond the electrical & chemical workings inside the brain. While we might theoretically be able to observe all of the variables & determine what someone's most likely decisions or actions will be, & be correct most of the time, the free mind can choose the unexpected in spite of any physical variables involved.

The mind with free will is the one variable that isn't completely predictable.

EDIT: I should add that I don't think the mind isn't subject to any natural law at all. I just don't think we know enough about the brain, the mind, & any natural laws that might apply. Side note: It's pretty mind-boggling that our minds can study themselves, isn't it?

 

I've had the ideas presented in this thread simmering in the back of my mind for awhile, but just haven't had the time to get back to this as much as I'd like to. Lots of interesting ideas here.

I have problems with macro-evolutionary theory as it currently stands & is taught. There are numerous reasons. Among those: I find "something from nothing" illogical. I find evolution from one species to another illogical & not supported by currently available evidence. But it's clear that evolution on a smaller level goes on all the time. The primary reason I haven't formed an opinion about other animals having free choice is that I haven't given enough study or thought to what differentiates the human mind from that of other animals. It's possible that what gives us the ability to make free choices is something that other animals don't have. Even if I assume that evolutionary theory is correct, it doesn't follow that all animals would develop whatever characteristic it is that gives humans free will.

I don't think that free will is necessarily an immunity to natural laws. My own unprovable opinion is that free will is an aspect of natural law that we just haven't discovered yet. To people in earlier centuries, it would appear that an airplane defies the law of gravity. However, we know that other scientific laws also apply, & we are able to use those conditions to create & fly that airplane.

What you've said sounds as if you might think that there has been some sort of evolution of natural laws themselves. Or am I misreading you?

The idea of predicting the future wasn't really my point either. I was just using that situation to illustrate the effect of free will on the course of events.

Yes, I think that all things being equal--including whatever unknown natural laws there might be that apply to free will--the same input always produces the same output. This can get really, really confusing, but I'm not saying that each condition or cause will lead a person to make the same choice every time. I mean that free choice itself is accounted for by some natural law.

Yes, people tend to do the same things over & over, to behave the same way repeatedly, to make the same choices day after day, year after year. I just don't believe that they do so because they can't do otherwise. The forces that lead them to behave the way they do are powerful, but not unchangeable.
It's difficult to compare psychological experiences from person to person. Still, just as we can observe the overwhelming tendency of people to repeat behaviors & behave predictably, we can also observe exceptions & make comparisons. Most of us have seen many people who seemed to have a lot going for them in terms of native abilities & opportunities, yet achieve little success or happiness. We've also seen examples of people who had very little going for them, who suffered many & severe difficulties beyond their control, & yet have achieved great things & known great happiness. We can't see all the variables involved in what makes any person who he is, & we can't measure them. Still, what we see is enough to make it likely, IMO, that individual free choices account for a lot of the differences in results. (There is also the problem of defining "success" or "happiness;" but that's a whole other can of worms.)

As I said above, I don't consider free will an immunity to or breaking of natural laws. I think other, to date unknown, natural laws apply. I don't think that's the same as natural law including lawlessness. Either unknown natural laws bring about things that currently appear random to us, but actually are not; or some randomness is the product of currently unknown natural laws.

 

well, if you accept the idea that there is a creator or some extra-cosmic force at work in the universe, then free will can simply be something imparted by the "soul" -- no reason to search the human brain or other physically manifested traits of humans when there's a whole other world out there that can't been seen and obeys no laws.

why wouldn't animals be able to develop free will in evolution/natural selection is accurate? mostly what we're talking about here can be described as consciousness/self awareness. one of the craziest things i've seen was a chimp checking himself out in the mirror, examining his own teeth. it seems pretty tame, but it was remarkable to see an animal making the connection that it was looking at itself.

i'd say that if animals can have a consciousness, then why couldn't they have a free will -- assuming that such a thing exists?

but the important distinction here is that airplanes obey natural laws and natural laws all obey cause and effect. or at least, that is how i see it. i suppose it's not exactly fair to say that natural laws are purely deterministic as a given, so i'll state that here as my belief. so if natural laws are indeed deterministic in nature (you drop a ball, it falls -- every time) then anything that is NOT deterministic would have to at some level not abide by those laws.

no, i think natural laws are timeless and immutable.

accounted for how? if the same input yields the same output, it would seem that there is no free will -- unless free will is somehow part of the output. like 1+5 = 2+4 = 3+3 = 2*3 = 7-1 = ... = 6 it's an odd analogy, but the point is that six is six, but you can split it up a bunch of different ways. if free will could be "factored out" (a la math) and was somehow variable, then maybe it makes some kind of odd sense... i dunno...

but everything you say here could simply be unintended consequences, trials building character, people rising to the occasion, etc. this is really just about unpredictable results, which i think is a given. we'll never be able to predict everything. heck, it doesn't take much for something to look random -- and for that matter, it doesn't take much for people to create patterns that aren't there.

don't get me wrong, either. i'm not suggesting that the "same input" is anything at all simple when saying you get the "same output" in terms of humans making choices. it's not like "well, you had coffee the day before so now you're going punch that kid". the basic premise here is that humans are purely physical and thus obey the physical laws. as such, brain chemistry is what drives personality and there's plenty of chemistry going on in your brain and it's in a feedback loop which makes it even more complex. it's impossible to ever achieve the same input because it's so complex.

there's the appearance of random and there's true random. i agree that we don't know everything there is to know about the natural order of the universe, but my gut tells me that truly random ain't part of it. if free will obey detreministic laws that are yet unknown, that really doesn't change anything -- free will would then not be free will since it would follow a strict cause and effect law.

but even if there is a true random in the natural universe, that would only show that cause and effect can be broken -- that the same cause can lead to mulitple differet effects. having some ability to direct those effects in some way would require yet some other ability or free will would be purely random. i just can't figure out how it would fit together without getting into the supernatural, which is something i don't really believe in.