Free-Will and Causality - Can there be both?
-
- Posts: 118
- Joined: March 3rd, 2007, 11:58 am
Free-Will and Causality - Can there be both?
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: March 14th, 2007, 10:25 pm
Re: Free-Will and Causality - Can there be both?
Define "we"? That maybe the answer to your question. Look at your own body. Each part of your body acts in one way or the other depending on circumstances that it encounters in relationship to the other parts acting in accordance to the whole. You are the part of the larger whole; and just as one part of your body acts in response to stimulus interpreted through a complicated process, you respond to stimulus in a similar way.cynicallyinsane wrote:If everything in the universe is determined causality (cause and effect), then how can we have free-will? Do we even have free-will?
You take part in the action as the actionable, but the whole effects those actions. You, as a part of the whole, can claim to be apart of this will, but you can not act alone or free from the will of the whole independently or through your own volition.
The belief in choice is predicated on the assumption of separation, as a separate entity with it's own power and control over the forces which shapes reality.
If free-will were actually true, then why would it be limited and whose will would supercede anothers by virtue of control over reality? Could two or more opposing wills exist in the same time and space?
Does will exist? yes! Is it ours alone? Doubtful!
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 7:39 pm
- Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
- Contact:
There is no overarching will. There is an overarching reality. No will can bend or shape reality. Reality is reality. There is no individual wills in a whole and there is no will depending on the will of others. And we do not have the same will as everyone else. Why? Because choices exist.
Casuality isn't Fate. In nature, it is systematic. An action will have a reaction...there will be an effect of some sort...and there has to be a cause for that effect. It doesn't deny free will. It just shows that there is a system of how things function.
Nature does not have a choice in it's causes and effects. Humans, however, have a choice...they have the free will to choose. They cannot change reality and there is no will that supercedes all. There is a standard that supercedes all...as said before, there is only ONE reality. There is not just one will. Each person has their own individual will. It all seems to add up to a complex system of causes and effects...but it all depends on the freely made choice of the individuals...it is not predetermined.
-
- Posts: 202
- Joined: March 7th, 2007, 9:51 pm
I would say that humans live in a world whereDanteAzrael wrote:Causality is not the antithesis to free will. In the case of people making choices, there are always consequences of some form that will take place. However, the consequences in human actions are not always the same. Some get away with actions that should have punishment and some get punished for actions that should be rewarded. There are many cases in such. I believe that, simply because there is a chance of the opposite effect happening from the type of action in human actions, that there is no way to ever deny free will. Of course, things will have a cause...and there will be an effect...an action will have a reaction. This isn't the antithesis to free will. The cause and effect of human actions is the choice and the consequence...but the consequences are not always the same.
There is no overarching will. There is an overarching reality. No will can bend or shape reality. Reality is reality. There is no individual wills in a whole and there is no will depending on the will of others. And we do not have the same will as everyone else. Why? Because choices exist.
Casuality isn't Fate. In nature, it is systematic. An action will have a reaction...there will be an effect of some sort...and there has to be a cause for that effect. It doesn't deny free will. It just shows that there is a system of how things function.
Nature does not have a choice in it's causes and effects. Humans, however, have a choice...they have the free will to choose. They cannot change reality and there is no will that supercedes all. There is a standard that supercedes all...as said before, there is only ONE reality. There is not just one will. Each person has their own individual will. It all seems to add up to a complex system of causes and effects...but it all depends on the freely made choice of the individuals...it is not predetermined.
free will and causality exist because we
are determined by outside forces to a point,
but we are also allowed to make choices within
those outside forces. However, it can be debated
that even our choices are controlled by outside forces since everything seems to fit inside a wheel
of time. We do have a free will, but there our
free will could also be pre-determined. If we
happen to change our minds about anything, it is done
within the confines of causality. This could apply
to any decision we make. It's almost as if time
has a way of reading palms or tarot cards. Your
future could already be decided for you, and
so your free will has to follow that pattern.
It's something to think about. I didn't
explain it as well as I wanted to.
you smart, it's knowing what you don't know.
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: March 14th, 2007, 10:25 pm
The future is the child of our past. Both the future and the past are synergistically dependent on the other, neither can exist without the present. To say one has free will implies that neither the past nor the future are dependent on the present. Free means without ties or binding; how does one become free of the moment? How does one change, without change being based on the present moment? Change requires force and force is exerted from one point and transfered or transformed to another.
For one to have free will would void any necessity of choice. Doesn't choice imply more than one's own will? As in your choice and another choice which is not yours.
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 7:39 pm
- Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
- Contact:
No, choice does not imply more than one's own will. Choice implies there are things to choose from. It's fairly that simple.selfless wrote:Think of a rat in a maze. The rat feels the choices it makes leads it to the cheese. But in ultimate reality the maze was built to have choices and avenues. The rat has the illusion of choice, but the drive is created by the placement of cheese, as reward for making an effort and choices are given to be overcome and teach. Thus, the rat learns and develops intelligence regarding the maze, but never masters the creator of the maze.
The future is the child of our past. Both the future and the past are synergistically dependent on the other, neither can exist without the present. To say one has free will implies that neither the past nor the future are dependent on the present. Free means without ties or binding; how does one become free of the moment? How does one change, without change being based on the present moment? Change requires force and force is exerted from one point and transfered or transformed to another.
For one to have free will would void any necessity of choice. Doesn't choice imply more than one's own will? As in your choice and another choice which is not yours.
The rat in the maze is not a good anaology because it would imply there is some ultimate creator of life - some sort of god. God's existence would very easily contradict the idea of Free Will. However, we do not outside forces determining what we do. I have stated previously that we are influnced, but we are not determined by them. Our rationality and values are how we choose.
The Rat in the maze is a psychological project...not a philosophical project. It shows how one knows what's one goal is and will continue to work its way towards that goal running into obstacles. It shows that all animals have that mindset. It is not about rather we have choices or not. In general, animals do not have many choices because they live on instincts. We, as humans, do not live on instincts.
The future is, in a sense, a child of our past. It depends on our choices made in the past. The present is the current outcome of what those choices have been. However, the future is NOT dependant on past choices. You can change the course of things with one simple choice. It doesn't follow a direct line that is determined outright by the first choice you ever make.
I think your common mistake is that there has to be something that supecedes one's will because you're thought process is that it is all determined by something else. You fight free will by calling free will determinism.
There is no force making you choose except yourself. There are influences, but they do determine your choice unless you allow them to do so. And, for one to have free will, choice is NECESSARY. For it to be determinism, choice would NOT BE NECESSARY because you have no choice in the first place. It would be determined. Your "choice" would not exist but merely be a product of some subjective projection of the mind.
In general, it almost seems you have the two ideas intermingled and caught in some sort of contradiction and you have to pick it out and sort it out.
-
- Posts: 202
- Joined: March 7th, 2007, 9:51 pm
has planned all his life to go to college. Suddenly he is admitted to rehab, and therfore he cannot attend college that semester. When he gets out, he feels that his life is ruined, and decides not to go to college. Later on, he decides to write a book on his life and how his addiction caused so many problems where there didn't have to Had he never been on drugs the book would not have been written.
So, the past does often determine our future, not always in a negative way, but often in a positive way. That doesn't mean you should dwell on the past,
but making wise choices can help us to improve our future.
you smart, it's knowing what you don't know.
-
- Posts: 202
- Joined: March 7th, 2007, 9:51 pm
has planned all his life to go to college. Suddenly he is admitted to rehab, and therfore he cannot attend college that semester. When he gets out, he feels that his life is ruined, and decides not to go to college. Later on, he decides to write a book on his life and how his addiction caused so many problems where there didn't have to Had he never been on drugs the book would not have been written.
So, the past does often determine our future, not always in a negative way, but often in a positive way. That doesn't mean you should dwell on the past,
but making wise choices can help us to improve our future.
you smart, it's knowing what you don't know.
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 7:39 pm
- Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: March 14th, 2007, 10:25 pm
If you have choice; where do the choices come from? Are you the choices maker, as well as the choice chooser? Do you come upon choices or do you create choices? Do you choose a morning sunrises or does it show itself in spite of you? If you were able to make choices, then why are you limited in your ability to make the sunrise not to rise in the morning? Why are your choices limited to your position in relationship to them?DanteAzrael wrote:No, choice does not imply more than one's own will. Choice implies there are things to choose from. It's fairly that simple.selfless wrote:Think of a rat in a maze. The rat feels the choices it makes leads it to the cheese. But in ultimate reality the maze was built to have choices and avenues. The rat has the illusion of choice, but the drive is created by the placement of cheese, as reward for making an effort and choices are given to be overcome and teach. Thus, the rat learns and develops intelligence regarding the maze, but never masters the creator of the maze.
The future is the child of our past. Both the future and the past are synergistically dependent on the other, neither can exist without the present. To say one has free will implies that neither the past nor the future are dependent on the present. Free means without ties or binding; how does one become free of the moment? How does one change, without change being based on the present moment? Change requires force and force is exerted from one point and transfered or transformed to another.
For one to have free will would void any necessity of choice. Doesn't choice imply more than one's own will? As in your choice and another choice which is not yours.
The rat in the maze is not a good anaology because it would imply there is some ultimate creator of life - some sort of god. God's existence would very easily contradict the idea of Free Will. However, we do not outside forces determining what we do. I have stated previously that we are influnced, but we are not determined by them. Our rationality and values are how we choose.
The Rat in the maze is a psychological project...not a philosophical project. It shows how one knows what's one goal is and will continue to work its way towards that goal running into obstacles. It shows that all animals have that mindset. It is not about rather we have choices or not. In general, animals do not have many choices because they live on instincts. We, as humans, do not live on instincts.
The future is, in a sense, a child of our past. It depends on our choices made in the past. The present is the current outcome of what those choices have been. However, the future is NOT dependant on past choices. You can change the course of things with one simple choice. It doesn't follow a direct line that is determined outright by the first choice you ever make.
I think your common mistake is that there has to be something that supecedes one's will because you're thought process is that it is all determined by something else. You fight free will by calling free will determinism.
There is no force making you choose except yourself. There are influences, but they do determine your choice unless you allow them to do so. And, for one to have free will, choice is NECESSARY. For it to be determinism, choice would NOT BE NECESSARY because you have no choice in the first place. It would be determined. Your "choice" would not exist but merely be a product of some subjective projection of the mind.
In general, it almost seems you have the two ideas intermingled and caught in some sort of contradiction and you have to pick it out and sort it out.
You can not prove the change of course of something making a choice? You can not exist in two possibilities at the same time to know the outcome of both choices are different or the sameupon making a choice. In making a choice one possibility becomes a reality and the other remains unknown. Duality is formed at the moment of choice.
You miss the obvious implication of having free will. Free will would be determinism in action, your own. Free will would be free of choice, because there would be no choice for you to make because only your will would manifest, what was not your will would not exist, nor even be known to exist since you did not will it be.
That we have the illusion of choice proves that the choices are not our own, but rather the will of one and illusion of having another.
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 7:39 pm
- Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
- Contact:
Once again, as I've stated before, choice comes from the fact that there are things to choose between. There's no profound explanation for the existence of choice. When there are two things that an individual is facing, he must make a choice between one or the two. It is that simple. That existence of choice comes from there being things in existence. The question would imply there is nothing in existence to choose from.
Choice maker or choice chooser...The first one doesn't really matter since in reality there are things to choose from. Who is the "choice maker"? I would say reality and what is contained within reality. Humans have practically created their own choices by their inventions and their ideas. We are both maker of choices and choosers. We're not either or in this case since we have the ability to create material items and ideas. And before we create materials, we have to make the choice rather to use this material or that to form the new one. So, once again, existence and reality is the what began choices and humans chose because it was necessaery. It really does not matter which one we are. We still make a choice to make the choice or to choose.
Coming upon choices and creating choices is a near redundancy of the previous question. Coming upon choices would be like the analogy of the fork in the road. Creating choices would be a person creating the fork in the road. Basically, one leads to another and it is once again us that is doing the choosing.
The reason why we are limited in not being able to make the sun rise or the sun set is answered by a simple answer: Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. We cannot control nature, we can only work with nature. We are not gods and we do not create our own reality. Humans do not function on whims and we are not powerful. Your mistake is that you believe that humans should have the power to create reality. The reality is that we don't. We are a part of reailty, a part of nature. We are not supernatural and we do not supercede the laws of nature nor are we subjective beings.
Once again, we are limited because we are not creators of reality. We perceive reality. That is all. We're not gods. Free Will is not "Ultimate Control Over Reality." Free Will is "The Ability To Freely Choose And Outside Forces Do Not Determine Us."
"You can not prove the change of course of something making a choice? You can not exist in two possibilities at the same time to know the outcome of both choices are different or the sameupon making a choice. In making a choice one possibility becomes a reality and the other remains unknown. Duality is formed at the moment of choice."
First of all, I cannot even understand the question because it's worded strangely. I assume you mean I cannot prove that a some choice changed the course of time. Of course, I can simply point you towards History and see what you make of the proof in there and the choices that were made that changed the course. We all exist in millions of different possibilities because choice exist. We do know the outcome because we cannot go into the future. We can only be aware of our present-day choices and notice where it might lead. When a choice is made, the other possibilities no longer exist. It doesn't remain in reality. It doesn't exist in reality. The only reality is the choice made. The other is non-existent and therefore pointless to care about in arguments.
"You miss the obvious implication of having free will. Free will would be determinism in action, your own. Free will would be free of choice, because there would be no choice for you to make because only your will would manifest, what was not your will would not exist, nor even be known to exist since you did not will it be."
No, you miss the obvious knowledge of Free Will and have conjured up some random thought based on nothing. Free Will would not be free of choice. Why so? Because free will does not imply "God." I have already stated what Free Will implies, so refer back to that. Choice is necessary for free will to exist? Why? Since choice exist, one must have the freedom of mind to choose which one he wants or desires. One's will does not and cannot manifest in reality. As I meant to state before, free will exists because we are limited. If we were NOT limited, we wouldn't have to actually choose because the reality would bend with the thought. It wouldn't take an action. Limitations help create choices as well. We are limited in materials, so we have to choose something else. We are limited in this, so we have to choose between other things. It all corresponds to the ability to freely make a choice. We are not determined by anything, but only influenced. If you believe Reality is something that keeps you from succeeding or choosing, I suggest you choose against living in Reality. Strangely enough, you would just come to find yourself in another contradiction in reality...that which you seemingly do not believe.
"That we have the illusion of choice proves that the choices are not our own, but rather the will of one and illusion of having another."
The problem with this statement would be that it is completely and horribly subjective, much like the rest of your argument. If you can objectively show me where we have the illusion of proof, I will gladly step aside and name you the victor. Choice is as blatantly in front of you as daylight, as grass, as trees, as yourself, as other humans, as everything within reality. Choice exists because of the radiant fact that there are things to choose from. Free Will is not the implication of the power of God. It is the implication that you choose freely what you want to do. What illusion is there of choice? I have explicitly chosen to continue this argument. I could've easily not to. I could've chosen a different approach. The great thing is, whatever I could've chosen no longer exists and this is the path that I chose much like your idea is the path you have. Unfortunately, I guess it just seems simple to me. I don't deny reality. Unlike...well...you.
-
- Posts: 118
- Joined: March 3rd, 2007, 11:58 am
-
- Posts: 202
- Joined: March 7th, 2007, 9:51 pm
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: March 14th, 2007, 10:25 pm
DanteAzrael wrote:"If you have choice; where do the choices come from? Are you the choices maker, as well as the choice chooser? Do you come upon choices or do you create choices? Do you choose a morning sunrises or does it show itself in spite of you? If you were able to make choices, then why are you limited in your ability to make the sunrise not to rise in the morning? Why are your choices limited to your position in relationship to them?"
Once again, as I've stated before, choice comes from the fact that there are things to choose between. There's no profound explanation for the existence of choice. When there are two things that an individual is facing, he must make a choice between one or the two. It is that simple. That existence of choice comes from there being things in existence. The question would imply there is nothing in existence to choose from.
The question is where do the choices come from, what is the source of the two things that an individual faces in choosing? Does the individual create the choices; or are they independent of the choosers will? This is an important question regarding choice. That there are choices precludes that they are given to be chosen. But, if both choices are given to be chosen, then where is the autonomy of choosing. You are choosing between what is presented before you, but you are not creating choices, you are accepting the options, as needing to be chosen. Saying you have free will within the limits of what is presented before you is not ultimately free. It is bound within the confines of options present.
I think the difference is in our idea of what free means in the having free will. You believe that free will is in your ability to chose between two objects. However, I say that one is not utilizing their will freely confined within the limits of what is presented to them. To truly have free will one would be able to create their own choices. They could be offered a coke or water and choose to drink wine. Kinda like Jesus turning water into wine. Now that's what I call free will. Creating options, not accepting options.
I don't deny reality. Unlike...well...you.
I live in reality and I don't deny it exist in our mind. You believe what you see,hear,taste, and feel is real. I know that all those sentient response to vibrational signals are interpreted and not a true representation of ultimate reality, but a best quess stab at it, so we can function within it.
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: March 14th, 2007, 10:25 pm
DanteAzrael wrote:"If you have choice; where do the choices come from? Are you the choices maker, as well as the choice chooser? Do you come upon choices or do you create choices? Do you choose a morning sunrises or does it show itself in spite of you? If you were able to make choices, then why are you limited in your ability to make the sunrise not to rise in the morning? Why are your choices limited to your position in relationship to them?"
Once again, as I've stated before, choice comes from the fact that there are things to choose between. There's no profound explanation for the existence of choice. When there are two things that an individual is facing, he must make a choice between one or the two. It is that simple. That existence of choice comes from there being things in existence. The question would imply there is nothing in existence to choose from.
The question is where do the choices come from, what is the source of the two things that an individual faces in choosing? Does the individual create the choices; or are they independent of the choosers will? This is an important question regarding choice. That there are choices precludes that they are given to be chosen. But, if both choices are given to be chosen, then where is the autonomy of choosing. You are choosing between what is presented before you, but you are not creating choices, you are accepting the options, as needing to be chosen. Saying you have free will within the limits of what is presented before you is not ultimately free. It is bound within the confines of options present.
I think the difference is in our idea of what free means in the having free will. You believe that free will is in your ability to chose between two objects. However, I say that one is not utilizing their will freely confined within the limits of what is presented to them. To truly have free will one would be able to create their own choices. They could be offered a coke or water and choose to drink wine. Kinda like Jesus turning water into wine. Now that's what I call free will. Creating options, not accepting options.
I don't deny reality. Unlike...well...you.
I live in reality and I don't deny it exist in our mind. You believe what you see,hear,taste, and feel is real. I know that all those sentient response to vibrational signals are interpreted and not a true representation of ultimate reality, but a best quess stab at it, so we can function within it.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023