You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
Do we Have free will?
Yes
54.55% (12 votes)
54.55% (12 votes)
No
45.45% (10 votes)
45.45% (10 votes)
Total Votes: 22
Do we Have free will? Is there a god?
Posted:
Do we Have free will? Is there a god?Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Dec 07, 201013Year Member
Posts: 448
Reputation Power: 21
What is "free will"?
We should start by learning the standard terminology associated with the "free will" debate.
1. "Will" means the function of choosing.
2. Constraining causes force people to act against their will. For example, a person being robbed at gunpoint is constrained in this sense. Non-constraining causes do not force people to act against their will but are sufficient to cause an action. For example, if you have a fear of heights, you probably will not want to walk on the edge of a tall building's roof; that fear is a non-constraining cause.
3. Indeterminism holds that genuinely free acts are not causally determined. Determinism holds that everything is causally determined (i.e., that prior events and conditions necessitate every event).
4. Incompatibilism holds that determinism and human freedom are incompatible; it rejects determinism and affirms human freedom. Compatibilism holds that determinism and human freedom are compatible.
5. Libertarian free will is the ability either to do something or not. Free agency is the ability to do whatever a person wants to do (apart from constraining causes). This difference is not a small one. For example, do non-Christians have the inherent ability either to choose to trust Christ or not? Is such a decision ultimately dependent on their will?
6. God's general sovereignty holds that God is in charge of everything without controlling everything. God's specific sovereignty holds that God ordains everything and that he controls everything to accomplish his purposes.
Source
My question to athiest?
This is probably the biggest issue for me
Part of the issue here is the nature of time. If the future exists for God even as the present does, then God is consistently in all places at all times and is not restricted by time. This would mean that time was not a part of His nature to which God is subject, and that God is not a linear entity; that is, it would mean that God is not restricted to operating in our time realm and is not restricted to the present only. If God is not restricted to existence in the present, our present, then the future is known by God because God indwells the future as well as the present (and the past). This would mean that our future choices, as free as they are, are simply known by God. Again, our ability to choose is not altered or lessened by God existing in the future and knowing what we freely choose. It just means that God can see what we will freely choose -- because that is what we freely choose -- and knows what it is.
Part of the problem in Open Theism is that by restricting God to the present only, His existence is defined in such a way as to imply that time is part of His nature and that He is restricted to it. The question is whether or not this is logical as well as biblical?
You Decide
We should start by learning the standard terminology associated with the "free will" debate.
1. "Will" means the function of choosing.
2. Constraining causes force people to act against their will. For example, a person being robbed at gunpoint is constrained in this sense. Non-constraining causes do not force people to act against their will but are sufficient to cause an action. For example, if you have a fear of heights, you probably will not want to walk on the edge of a tall building's roof; that fear is a non-constraining cause.
3. Indeterminism holds that genuinely free acts are not causally determined. Determinism holds that everything is causally determined (i.e., that prior events and conditions necessitate every event).
4. Incompatibilism holds that determinism and human freedom are incompatible; it rejects determinism and affirms human freedom. Compatibilism holds that determinism and human freedom are compatible.
5. Libertarian free will is the ability either to do something or not. Free agency is the ability to do whatever a person wants to do (apart from constraining causes). This difference is not a small one. For example, do non-Christians have the inherent ability either to choose to trust Christ or not? Is such a decision ultimately dependent on their will?
6. God's general sovereignty holds that God is in charge of everything without controlling everything. God's specific sovereignty holds that God ordains everything and that he controls everything to accomplish his purposes.
Source
http://www.reformation21.org/articles/do-we-have-free-will.php
My question to athiest?
For anyone who does not believe in a god or anything whats your view I would like to know?
This is probably the biggest issue for me
Part of the issue here is the nature of time. If the future exists for God even as the present does, then God is consistently in all places at all times and is not restricted by time. This would mean that time was not a part of His nature to which God is subject, and that God is not a linear entity; that is, it would mean that God is not restricted to operating in our time realm and is not restricted to the present only. If God is not restricted to existence in the present, our present, then the future is known by God because God indwells the future as well as the present (and the past). This would mean that our future choices, as free as they are, are simply known by God. Again, our ability to choose is not altered or lessened by God existing in the future and knowing what we freely choose. It just means that God can see what we will freely choose -- because that is what we freely choose -- and knows what it is.
Part of the problem in Open Theism is that by restricting God to the present only, His existence is defined in such a way as to imply that time is part of His nature and that He is restricted to it. The question is whether or not this is logical as well as biblical?
You Decide
#2. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
You are tightrope walking right now...
The only reason I say that is because most people are very single-minded about their views on life. If I was to make a topic saying I was an athiest (which I am) then there would be swarms of people saying I am going to hell, that I am a sinner, etc.
So my views on the world are, and though they may not be correct, that the world was created by the big bang, not by a deity. We do have free will, and even if their is some form of a God, we always will, as our decisions shape our lives.
Last edited by Botch ; edited 1 time in total
The only reason I say that is because most people are very single-minded about their views on life. If I was to make a topic saying I was an athiest (which I am) then there would be swarms of people saying I am going to hell, that I am a sinner, etc.
So my views on the world are, and though they may not be correct, that the world was created by the big bang, not by a deity. We do have free will, and even if their is some form of a God, we always will, as our decisions shape our lives.
Last edited by Botch ; edited 1 time in total
- 1useful
- 2not useful
#3. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 04, 201112Year Member
Posts: 2,477
Reputation Power: 107
I dont care what people think about me but i believe in God that he is real.
- 10useful
- 1not useful
#4. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Dec 07, 201013Year Member
Posts: 448
Reputation Power: 21
@Botch
I see where your coming from, I like to look at the world in all different points of views, If your an atheist, I actually respect that I have some personal views on the atheist point of view on how the world was created as well.
I see where your coming from, I like to look at the world in all different points of views, If your an atheist, I actually respect that I have some personal views on the atheist point of view on how the world was created as well.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#5. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Zax wrote @BotchI have respect for everyone's views on life, unless they try to force their will on me. If you want to be Christian, so be it. Muslim, have fun. As long as you are content in the way you think, then you are cool with me.
I see where your coming from, I like to look at the world in all different points of views, If your an atheist, I actually respect that I have some personal views on the atheist point of view on how the world was created as well.
Oh yeah, and if you wanted to respond to me, click the quote button at the top of my post. ;) Future reference.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#6. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
My view is that every religion on this Earth is false, but a god is a possibility. I just don't think this being, if real, cares about this planet. I think it just monitors the universe, or maybe monitors and creates multiverses if that is true as well. It's just too hard to believe all of this came from nothing, but the religions of this planet make no sense. I'm moreso Agnostic I guess. I'm just keeping everything as a possibility and just going with the flow.
- 2useful
- 1not useful
#7. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Yin wrote My view is that every religion on this Earth is false, but a god is a possibility. I just don't think this being, if real, cares about this planet. I think it just monitors the universe, or maybe monitors and creates multiverses if that is true as well. It's just too hard to believe all of this came from nothing, but the religions of this planet make no sense. I'm moreso Agnostic I guess. I'm just keeping everything as a possibility and just going with the flow.
You make a good point, and yet, the multiverse theory may counter yours. Although it is hard to believe that life could start from nothing, or even the universe starting itself, there is always a variable in the universe that is changing. Nothing will ever stay the same forever. Back on topic, life could have started without a god, in a force that affects our everyday lives: Chance. Just as a newborn child has a chance to be a boy or a girl, the infinite number of multiverses have the chance to create life. If one does not have it, the next one may, or the next one, or the next one. It's like the lottery; you may lose a lot of times, but eventually you will win.
- 1useful
- 0not useful
#8. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 19, 201113Year Member
Posts: 485
Reputation Power: 28
I dont believe in anything because no one knows the truth. For no one knows the complete truth. You cant just form something out of nothing you know. Also, if their is god then why cant we all see him? Why do we have to believe to see him?
Oh well at this point of time i dont care anymore about beliefs i just focus on living my life.
Oh well at this point of time i dont care anymore about beliefs i just focus on living my life.
- 1useful
- 0not useful
#9. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Here's my view on Free Will [copied/pasted from an older post of mine]
The problem is that we live in a world of cause and effect. So, either our wills are determined by prior causes, which means we have no control over them. Or they are determined by chance, which means we have no control over them. Or there is some combination of chance and determinism, but no combination gives you the perception of Free Will that we have in our day to day lives.
Consider a generic serial killer. His choice to commit his last murder was determined by neuro-physiological events in his brain. Which were in turn determined by prior causes, bad genes, traumatic childhood, a sleepless night because the car alarm down the street kept going off. These events precede any conscious decision to act.
What does it mean to say that this murderer committed to it of his own free will. If this statement means anything it means that he could have behaved differently. He could have declined the impulse to commit the murder or simply refused to have the impulse. Not at the basis of some random influences that he had no conscious control but because he was actually the conscious author of his thoughts and actions.
Now, when we assume that violent criminals have such freedom, of course, we reflexively blame them but when we look at this wider net of causality the basis for placing blame seems to evaporate. The moment we catch sight of a stream of causes that lead back to childhood his culpability seems to disappear, and to say that he would've done otherwise or could he have done otherwise had he chose this is simply to say he would've lived in a different universe had he lived in a different universe. As sickening as I would find such a persons behavior, If I were to switch places with him, I would be him there's no extra part of me that could resist the impulse to victimize innocent people, and even if you believe that every one of us harbors an immortal soul, this problem of responsibility remains. I cannot take credit for the fact that I don't have the soul of a psychopath.
So, If i was in this persons shoes with his brain, with his genes, with his life experiences I would not be able to behave any differently.
Forums/t=4211671/p=26272115/free-...usion.html
The problem is that we live in a world of cause and effect. So, either our wills are determined by prior causes, which means we have no control over them. Or they are determined by chance, which means we have no control over them. Or there is some combination of chance and determinism, but no combination gives you the perception of Free Will that we have in our day to day lives.
Consider a generic serial killer. His choice to commit his last murder was determined by neuro-physiological events in his brain. Which were in turn determined by prior causes, bad genes, traumatic childhood, a sleepless night because the car alarm down the street kept going off. These events precede any conscious decision to act.
What does it mean to say that this murderer committed to it of his own free will. If this statement means anything it means that he could have behaved differently. He could have declined the impulse to commit the murder or simply refused to have the impulse. Not at the basis of some random influences that he had no conscious control but because he was actually the conscious author of his thoughts and actions.
Now, when we assume that violent criminals have such freedom, of course, we reflexively blame them but when we look at this wider net of causality the basis for placing blame seems to evaporate. The moment we catch sight of a stream of causes that lead back to childhood his culpability seems to disappear, and to say that he would've done otherwise or could he have done otherwise had he chose this is simply to say he would've lived in a different universe had he lived in a different universe. As sickening as I would find such a persons behavior, If I were to switch places with him, I would be him there's no extra part of me that could resist the impulse to victimize innocent people, and even if you believe that every one of us harbors an immortal soul, this problem of responsibility remains. I cannot take credit for the fact that I don't have the soul of a psychopath.
So, If i was in this persons shoes with his brain, with his genes, with his life experiences I would not be able to behave any differently.
Forums/t=4211671/p=26272115/free-...usion.html
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#10. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 31, 201211Year Member
Posts: 1,553
Reputation Power: 65
Wez wrote Here's my view on Free Will [copied/pasted from an older post of mine]You pose a good point, but we still have free will. Although what you said is true, our lives are mapped by prior causes, we still have the ability to make choices. Have you ever been in a deli, and were wondering what kind of sandwich you wanted to purchase, and were finally down to a choice between two? You don't choose the one you want because of pre-determined events, you choose it because you, the controller of your fate, wants it. Although a sandwich shop is not an elaborate event, this method of choice happens in an infinite amount of scenarios, all with different outcomes.
The problem is that we live in a world of cause and effect. So, either our wills are determined by prior causes, which means we have no control over them. Or they are determined by chance, which means we have no control over them. Or there is some combination of chance and determinism, but no combination gives you the perception of Free Will that we have in our day to day lives.
Consider a generic serial killer. His choice to commit his last murder was determined by neuro-physiological events in his brain. Which were in turn determined by prior causes, bad genes, traumatic childhood, a sleepless night because the car alarm down the street kept going off. These events precede any conscious decision to act.
What does it mean to say that this murderer committed to it of his own free will. If this statement means anything it means that he could have behaved differently. He could have declined the impulse to commit the murder or simply refused to have the impulse. Not at the basis of some random influences that he had no conscious control but because he was actually the conscious author of his thoughts and actions.
Now, when we assume that violent criminals have such freedom, of course, we reflexively blame them but when we look at this wider net of causality the basis for placing blame seems to evaporate. The moment we catch sight of a stream of causes that lead back to childhood his culpability seems to disappear, and to say that he would've done otherwise or could he have done otherwise had he chose this is simply to say he would've lived in a different universe had he lived in a different universe. As sickening as I would find such a persons behavior, If I were to switch places with him, I would be him there's no extra part of me that could resist the impulse to victimize innocent people, and even if you believe that every one of us harbors an immortal soul, this problem of responsibility remains. I cannot take credit for the fact that I don't have the soul of a psychopath.
So, If i was in this persons shoes with his brain, with his genes, with his life experiences I would not be able to behave any differently.
Forums/t=4211671/p=26272115/free-...usion.html
- 1useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.