Some thoughts on Free Will

[spookymooky]

Free Will

It doesnt really seem to make sense to me--the idea is that we are endowed with the ability to make our own choices. At first this seems to be the case, after all, I'm choosing to write this right now, right?

Maybe not.

Why do I make a decision? There seem to be two causes: my natural inclinations, and my prior experiences, including prior decisions. There might also be some random firing of neurons and such thrown in there.

All of these things are out of my control. Obviously I didnt have a hand in choosing my genetics. As far as experiences go, I cant control my enviorment. My earliest decisions were a result of instinct and enviorment. While my later and current decisions resulted from those.

Thinking is itself a choice: to begin thinking, what to think about, etc. Thus, thinking is not a variable in the choosing, it is choosing.

If all this is true, if choosing relies on genetics, experience, and chance, and if all these are out of our control, choosing is not within our control. It is not something we can truly do. Its like pulling your hand of a hot stove: just a reflex.

 

[Dekstar]

Free Will

It doesnt really seem to make sense to me--the idea is that we are endowed with the ability to make our own choices. At first this seems to be the case, after all, I'm choosing to write this right now, right?

Maybe not.

Why do I make a decision? There seem to be two causes: my natural inclinations, and my prior experiences, including prior decisions. There might also be some random firing of neurons and such thrown in there.

All of these things are out of my control. Obviously I didnt have a hand in choosing my genetics. As far as experiences go, I cant control my enviorment. My earliest decisions were a result of instinct and enviorment. While my later and current decisions resulted from those.

Thinking is itself a choice: to begin thinking, what to think about, etc. Thus, thinking is not a variable in the choosing, it is choosing.

If all this is true, if choosing relies on genetics, experience, and chance, and if all these are out of our control, choosing is not within our control. It is not something we can truly do. Its like pulling your hand of a hot stove: just a reflex.

Yeah but it's better not to think that way, or you might end up killing yourelf as the ultimate test of choice :\

 

[spookymooky]

If you're interested, Ive got a couple similiar things I can post. Theyre from my blog.

 

[spookymooky]

but if what he is saying is true then you have already made up the decision if u are gunna kill ur self... :/

Actually, the decision has been made for me...

 

[Dekstar]

Actually, the decision has been made for me...

Which was my point

Anyway yeah post ahead. it's interesting to see how other people think

 

[spookymooky]

Heres my introduction:

Life, the Universe, and Everything

Discard everything you think you know about the universe. Its all wrong.

Before I sound overly arrogant, I'd better tell you: I dont have the answer either.

But an odd thing about human existance seems to be (and I dont even know this), that we know nothing. Nothing at all. What we percieve to be the universe is merely a reflection of it, as we percieve it through our senses. Theres more than five, by the way. Six at least: balance. Likely many more. And those senses often mislead us. Ever see an optical illusion?

Everything any human has ever hoped to know is an illusion of some kind. Everything is theory. Darwin is a theory. God is a theory. The fact that you exist is a theory, a conclusion drawn from evidence.

One of the few capacities which seperate humans from the other animals is our ability to learn. Homo Sapiens is a misnomer. The "wise man" isnt wise, he only possesses the ability and desire to learn.

Remember, Philosophy is the love of learning, not knowlege. If man knew everything, he would be useless, his intent is to learn.

Therefore, be glad that we know nothing, for because of this there lies an infinite body of knowlege before us.

 

[spookymooky]

On sin

Heres something I wrote for religion class.

Though it sounds harsh, I, personally, do everything out of selfishness, even if much of it is probably on the subconscious, though I am aware of it. I get a bite to eat because it will make me less hungry. More than that, I get up, in order to get a bite to eat, because the thought that I will soon not be hungry feels good. I talk to someone because socializing feels good. For me, even seemingly selfless acts are done out of selfishness. I am nice to someone for one or more of a couple reasons: I want them to like me, or I feel pleasure, seeing them happy even if they don’t recognize that I did something to help them. When I help of others, I'm really doing it for myself; even then, I'm only doing it to benefit myself. I would die for some of my friends, but because it causes me pleasure, as odd as that sounds. I immediately feel pleasure at the thought of the respect I will receive, and the thought that I will be showing love for them, etc. So, my motivations are always selfish.

Now, it seems that intention is what determines wrongness in an action. capitol punishment is a good example of this. The difference between “execution” and “murder” is only the intent. The difference between murder and what a soldier does is just intent. How can one intending to do good commit a sin? If a person has no evil intention, then they did not produce evil. If evil exists, it is merely a byproduct, and the person cannot be held responsible for it. Even if they did consciously choose evil, such a choice is not their fault. That choice was as direct result of some combination of their genetic predisposition, and their life experience, neither of which they could control. What else is their to influence their decision?

If I do everything to benefit myself, and therefore my intent is good, in that my only intent is to improve my own condition, regardless of others, and if sin requires bad intent, I cannot sin.

 

[spookymooky]

Here is my religion teacher's, response to my essay:

C+ [lowest grade in the class, its religion class after all]

"Thank you for attempting to explain your disbelief in morality & the absence of any moral principles. In that case, I guess that you think murder is ok if it benefits you."

I think that today I discovered where my problem with the standard view of morality lies: with the concept of Natural Law. Our Morality textbook calls it "Natural Moral Law" and defines it as "moral principles arrived at through rational investigation of human nature." Later it says that the three elements of this Natural Moral Law are "Be yourself. Act naturally. Be true to human nature."

It seems to me, that the church, and most of western culture, automatically assumes that people act, or are inclined to act, well. The church means that "well" in such a way that it is pleasing to God. General culture implies that it is for the good of the people around you, or society as a whole.

Humans to me seem rather inclined to help one another. After all, we are highly social creatures. Why else would we live together in huge cities, to the point of overcrowding, when much of the earth's surface is, or nearly is, inhabitable, and unsettled?

Since I havent mentioned it before, I probable should now: I dont view humanity as anything other than another animal, though unique and highly specialized. Man is the animal that thinks, and, as such, he has risen to the top of the food chain, more able to defend his place their than any animal before him. Most humans seem to have an incredible arrogance about them. They seem to assume that other creatures can think, or feel. True, its rather unlikely that other animals can reason on anything near the level we can. They have no need to. Learning and reasoning is exactly what secures our place on top of the food chain. Why should man have any special "divinely bestowed" rights or responsibilities?

Anyways, humans are inclined to help one another, with obvious benefits. As they build society, life becomes more pleasurable to them. A primitive tribe who could stick together and help and protect eachother probably lasted longer than just as many individuals trying to survive on their own.

Its seems like more than a coincidence that what most consider morally right, tends to help make society more efficient, and keep it from falling apart. Obviously such things such as murder and theft hurt it, but think about things that are just a little bit right, like opening a door. Doesnt that help the system in general? It requires slightly less energy and time expended by two people combined if one holds the door for the other. These things may be trifling, but think of how embedded they are in your mind. Would you ever consider let a door close when somebody you dont know is just nearby?

It seems to me that those things which we consider sins, or wrongnesses are actually not offenses against God, but society.

Ive got quite a bit more on the nature of society, but I think Ive written enough for now. By the way, if you see something I write that you dont like, or seems wrong, or doesnt add up to you, please comment, I like discussing this kind of stuff.

 

[spookymooky]

Heres an earlier Thread I made, and the link:
If God is a perfect creator then, by definition, his creation must be perfect. Just as a perfect artist would create a perfect work of art. This being what identifies the artist/creator as perfect.

This world obviously has a lot of pain and suffering. This implies one of three things:
1. There is no God. (if this is what you think, thats fine, but please dont respond to this thread a million times stating that).
2. God is imperfect.
3. God created the world with pain in it for a reason.

Now, I dont have much to say about the first two except that if either is true, nothing matters much. But, I believe I may have stumbled on why God might have created it.

My answer (besides 42) is that God created the world as a joke.

Pain is the basis of all humor.

That statement can easily be discredited by simply giving me an example of a joke which doesnt involve pain. The easiest response to this is a joke such as "Why did the chicken cross the road" and such. Now, this is a riddle. Any humor to be found in a riddle is the result of one of two things:
1) Humans are amused with riddles because they are something new and clever. This is the same reason one is attracted to something "shiny", like a new gadget.
2)The humor is actually a result of the person's inability to guess something simple and obvious. They laugh upon realizing that they wasted quite a bit of mental energy attempting to solve something right under their noses the whole time.

Therefore, if there is a God, and he is perfect, he created the entire world simply for a laugh.

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=42380

 

[Dan]

Wow, your religion teacher is a tool. Tell him I said that.

 

[xLostx]

All I have to say is - You're never allowed to think again!

 

[Kebean PFC]

I find your thinking to be interesting, and it is very hard to discuss this over an internet forum, but ill try.

If you have read Freud, you know that he believes everything has to do with sex, and i broaden it furthur, everything revolves around pleasure, and the want for it. When you said that no matter what you did was for self intrest, i think you are correct, you did it for the feeling of pleasure you knew you would recive. When a criminal commits a crime, he does it so that he can recive pleasure (even if it is just eating).

That said, humans in general are never happy with what they have, and always want more. So therefore the whole world is motivated by pleasure.




No person here is truely free, no matter where you are. Who you are is dictated by your heritage and your experience. Following this logic, everthing is precontrived, and there is nothing you can do to fight it.

I am really tired right now, so if this doesn't make sense, sorry, ill edit it in the morning.

 

[CrazyHarij]

Heres an earlier Thread I made, and the link:
If God is a perfect creator then, by definition, his creation must be perfect. Just as a perfect artist would create a perfect work of art. This being what identifies the artist/creator as perfect.

This world obviously has a lot of pain and suffering. This implies one of three things:
1. There is no God. (if this is what you think, thats fine, but please dont respond to this thread a million times stating that).
2. God is imperfect.
3. God created the world with pain in it for a reason.

Now, I dont have much to say about the first two except that if either is true, nothing matters much. But, I believe I may have stumbled on why God might have created it.

My answer (besides 42) is that God created the world as a joke.

Pain is the basis of all humor.

That statement can easily be discredited by simply giving me an example of a joke which doesnt involve pain. The easiest response to this is a joke such as "Why did the chicken cross the road" and such. Now, this is a riddle. Any humor to be found in a riddle is the result of one of two things:
1) Humans are amused with riddles because they are something new and clever. This is the same reason one is attracted to something "shiny", like a new gadget.
2)The humor is actually a result of the person's inability to guess something simple and obvious. They laugh upon realizing that they wasted quite a bit of mental energy attempting to solve something right under their noses the whole time.

Therefore, if there is a God, and he is perfect, he created the entire world simply for a laugh.

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=42380

I'm not what you call religious, but there is a reasonable argument why there can both be evil and god in existance:

Does evil exist? The university professor challenged his students with
this question. Did God create everything that exists?

A student bravely replied, "Yes, he did!"

"God created everything?" The professor asked.

"Yes, sir," the student replied.

The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil,
since evil exists, and according to the principal that our works define who
we are, then, God is evil."

The student became quiet before such an answer.

The professor was quite pleased with himself and boasted to the students
that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth.

Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question
professor?"

"Of course," replied the professor.

The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"

"What kind of question is this? Of course, it exists. Have you never been
cold?"

The students snickered at the young man's question.

The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the
laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat.
Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits
energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy.
Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter
becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not
exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no
heat."

The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist?"

The professor responded, "Of course it does."

The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist
either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study,
but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light
into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You
cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of
darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is?
You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a
term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."

Finally the young man asked the professor. "Sir, does evil exist?"

Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course as I have already said.
We see it every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man.
It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world.
"These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does
not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like
darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of
God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist
just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man
does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that
comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no
light."

The professor sat down. The young man's name?

Albert Einstein.

I seriously dont' think organized religion is the answer, since it's only another word for serving the state and government. Also, if there is anything like a divine existance of some sort, it is definitely not some big guy who casts lightning. You need to take into consideration that most scriptures were written very long ago and how they might have explained the divine. Some flaws are in translation as well, the word Elohim (original hebrew word which is translated to God) in the bible for instance actually means "Gods and Goddesses". Think of this: Eliah in the bible is taken away by a "flying chariot of fire". Doesn't that sound much like how you'd explain a spaceship or UFO to someone back then?

However, the fact that organised religion is insane doesn't automatically mean there is no such thing as divinity etc.

I have nothing against enlightenment and would very much like to work to achieve it with the right means, it's just that I want the truth and nothing else. I don't want to live a lie believing in a religion which isn't true, or not believing in anything when there is truth to have faith in (faith and belief isn't the same thing).

The problem is that every group or scripture even remotely related to religion has to claim it has the truth packed into a box. The truth can't be found by just reading a scripture literally, neither in a downloadable PDF or book off Amazon.

edit: Oh, and the only thing you can ever be completely sure of at all times is the existance of you and your own consciousness.

 

[spookymooky]

If there is a lack of Good in some places, the argument still applies. Either God left those areas without good on purpose, or by accident.