Free will

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
Halc
Posts: 405
Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm

Re: Free will

Post by Halc »

Dachshund wrote: July 13th, 2018, 10:25 pm
Halc wrote: July 13th, 2018, 6:55 pm Your concept then. I don't find horses or humans to be anything more than just a different arrangement of fundamental particles.
Halc, right now, as you ( a living human being) read this post you are not just an ensemble of physical particles, because you also possess consciousness. Right now you have a both a physical "flesh and blood" body PLUS a waking consciousness ( phenomenal/mental domain); and this waking consciousness does really /actually exist - no scientist denies this. In short, we know that there is such a thing as human diurnal consciousness, and we know that whatever is the essential "stuff" of which it is comprised, that "stuff" is certainly not physical matter of the kind that the "fundamental particles" (atoms, molecules, ions, etc.) you say that human beings ( like yourself at this moment) are exclusively comprised of. Right ?

Regards

Dachshund
'We' do not know this. Apparently you do. You didn't state that science confirms this I notice.
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Free will

Post by ThomasHobbes »

LuckyR wrote: July 14th, 2018, 4:41 am
ThomasHobbes wrote: July 13th, 2018, 2:52 am

"pre-" is redundant.
I know you disagree, you said that already. "Pre-" is till redundant, as nothing is yet written.

We are writing the future as we go, and each new day is a novel response to a multiplicity of causality.
The future remains a series of blank pages, for most people. Why not get out of your rut, which you seem dedicated to stay in and try something new. Give up your job and gor for a very long walk!
We you to do that this post would be a contribution to the cause of you doing that, and the rest would be determined by your circumstances, and your personality.
Don't misunderstand me. I personally don't believe in Pre-determination, thus I do believe in Free Will. Therefore I agree with you that not only is the future not predictable due to a lack of knowledge about innumerable variables and a lack of computing power, it is truly not yet determined.

Of course most, if all physical situations are governed by causality and are determined. In my view behavior is a special case that is not solely determined by the paths of subatomic particles. Thus: Free Will.
What you are doing is reducing act of will to random events - that does not meet your needs.

If my acts of will are not fully determined by my experience then they are useless and meaningless.

If you want to do special case pleading, you need a powerful argument. I see nothing of the kind here.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Free will

Post by LuckyR »

ThomasHobbes wrote: July 15th, 2018, 4:17 am
LuckyR wrote: July 14th, 2018, 4:41 am

Don't misunderstand me. I personally don't believe in Pre-determination, thus I do believe in Free Will. Therefore I agree with you that not only is the future not predictable due to a lack of knowledge about innumerable variables and a lack of computing power, it is truly not yet determined.

Of course most, if all physical situations are governed by causality and are determined. In my view behavior is a special case that is not solely determined by the paths of subatomic particles. Thus: Free Will.
What you are doing is reducing act of will to random events - that does not meet your needs.

If my acts of will are not fully determined by my experience then they are useless and meaningless.

If you want to do special case pleading, you need a powerful argument. I see nothing of the kind here.
Anyone can tell my post gave a synopsis and my conclusion, not an exhaustive reasoning for how I got there.

What you call "fully determined" is lazy shorthand for a combination of post hoc rationalizations and known true influences on behavior (choices). If by causality and/or determination you mean true, verifiable influencers that predict human choices much better than chance, yet far from 100% accuracy, then we are in agreement.

If OTOH, you say that there are numerous, as yet undiscovered such influencers and if we could somehow (at some future time) know about them all, then human choices could be fully predictable, my comments would be the following: in my opinion, we'll never be able to fully understand all of these influencers, such as past experiences, brain neurochemistry/wiring, psychology etc, but as a thought experiment I don't have a problem with putting all of these current unknowns into a black box and announcing that "this" (as yet unknown and perhaps unknowable) thing fully determines, causes and/or predicts human behavior.

Barring the above, the burden of proof shifts to determinists to show the steps whereby human choices are, in fact determined, since all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Free will

Post by chewybrian »

LuckyR wrote: July 15th, 2018, 6:21 am Barring the above, the burden of proof shifts to determinists to show the steps whereby human choices are, in fact determined, since all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
I thought I was alone in this view!

My reasoning is that subjective experience tells us all that we have free will. The burden of proof should be on the one who wishes to believe something not able to be perceived (like God), or to deny something which is perceived (like free will).

I am curious what statistical evidence you are referencing which shows actions are not determined.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Free will

Post by ThomasHobbes »

LuckyR wrote: July 15th, 2018, 6:21 am
ThomasHobbes wrote: July 15th, 2018, 4:17 am

What you are doing is reducing act of will to random events - that does not meet your needs.

If my acts of will are not fully determined by my experience then they are useless and meaningless.

If you want to do special case pleading, you need a powerful argument. I see nothing of the kind here.
Anyone can tell my post gave a synopsis and my conclusion, not an exhaustive reasoning for how I got there.

What you call "fully determined" is lazy shorthand for a combination of post hoc rationalizations and known true influences on behavior (choices). If by causality and/or determination you mean true, verifiable influencers that predict human choices much better than chance, yet far from 100% accuracy, then we are in agreement.

If OTOH, you say that there are numerous, as yet undiscovered such influencers and if we could somehow (at some future time) know about them all, then human choices could be fully predictable, my comments would be the following: in my opinion, we'll never be able to fully understand all of these influencers, such as past experiences, brain neurochemistry/wiring, psychology etc, but as a thought experiment I don't have a problem with putting all of these current unknowns into a black box and announcing that "this" (as yet unknown and perhaps unknowable) thing fully determines, causes and/or predicts human behavior.

Barring the above, the burden of proof shifts to determinists to show the steps whereby human choices are, in fact determined, since all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
You are squirming.
But then you are determined to do so since that is your personality.
There is no burden of proof against things being caused by other things. The problem seems to be the absurd notion that you claim; that you can choose without antecedence, ex nihilo, as if such a choice would be meaningful or useful.
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Free will

Post by Thinking critical »

ThomasHobbes wrote: July 13th, 2018, 3:13 pm "... emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t..."

These are all determined by physical states of cerebral matter, without exception.
Wrong.
To be clear I said
Because the conscious experience is not solely contingent on matter, as I also said we have to consider the effects of emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t
You are over simplifying the problem of the relationship between the physical brain and the mind. Individual personalities do not emerge due to the particular arrangement of particles which our brains consist of. The individual mind is a result of genetic variations and upbringing, our experiences alter the neurological pathways between neurons making one combination of synapses more probable than another.
Cerebral matter may determine a single function directly prior, however this is just one step in an intricate web of causal processes and relationships from biochemical and external influences.
Traumatic experiences will litterally cause the rearrangement of synapses which will consequently cause the subject to react/respond in a specific manner under certain future circumstances. The conscious experience doesn't operate independently from the physical brain just as neuro pathways won't form in specific sequences without the information gained from conscious experiences. We can't study or analyse brain matter to determine someone's favourite color.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Free will

Post by LuckyR »

chewybrian wrote: July 15th, 2018, 7:30 am
LuckyR wrote: July 15th, 2018, 6:21 am Barring the above, the burden of proof shifts to determinists to show the steps whereby human choices are, in fact determined, since all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
I thought I was alone in this view!

My reasoning is that subjective experience tells us all that we have free will. The burden of proof should be on the one who wishes to believe something not able to be perceived (like God), or to deny something which is perceived (like free will).

I am curious what statistical evidence you are referencing which shows actions are not determined.
First of all I am addressing Free Will as specifically applied to human behavior (choices).

Happy to help out. The proof of determination is the prospective use of the causes or determining factors of a potential action to successfully predict future actions. This has been done for centuries with the behavior of billiard balls and planets, yet has never been demonstrated with human behavior. True, analysis of various factors such as personality, diagnoses such as depression, post-traumatic stress etc can predict certain behaviors/choices better than blind guessing (random choices), yet far from 100% accuracy. Imagine if our understanding of Newtonian mechanics was so poor that we could predict the behavior of billiard balls 30% of the time! Would an inhabitant of that universe say that a billiard ball's behavior was determined or that they acted as if they "chose" what to do on their own? That's where we are with "determining" human behavior.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Free will

Post by chewybrian »

LuckyR wrote: July 16th, 2018, 9:25 am
First of all I am addressing Free Will as specifically applied to human behavior (choices).

Happy to help out. The proof of determination is the prospective use of the causes or determining factors of a potential action to successfully predict future actions. This has been done for centuries with the behavior of billiard balls and planets, yet has never been demonstrated with human behavior. True, analysis of various factors such as personality, diagnoses such as depression, post-traumatic stress etc can predict certain behaviors/choices better than blind guessing (random choices), yet far from 100% accuracy. Imagine if our understanding of Newtonian mechanics was so poor that we could predict the behavior of billiard balls 30% of the time! Would an inhabitant of that universe say that a billiard ball's behavior was determined or that they acted as if they "chose" what to do on their own? That's where we are with "determining" human behavior.
I agree with you about the burden of proof. But, you seem to now be saying that there is no proof of determinism, rather than saying there is positive proof of free will, which is what I thought I saw when I read:
LuckyR wrote: July 15th, 2018, 6:21 am ...all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
Watching humans tends to show they have free will, but the determinist will simply say that the many factors which go into behavior are too much for us to calculate and use to accurately predict behavior. I thought we had no experiments to show free will or determinism to be valid, and I guess this is still the case (and may always be).

I thought you had some new info, but I'll settle for your vote on the burden of proof.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Free will

Post by LuckyR »

chewybrian wrote: July 16th, 2018, 10:02 am
LuckyR wrote: July 16th, 2018, 9:25 am
First of all I am addressing Free Will as specifically applied to human behavior (choices).

Happy to help out. The proof of determination is the prospective use of the causes or determining factors of a potential action to successfully predict future actions. This has been done for centuries with the behavior of billiard balls and planets, yet has never been demonstrated with human behavior. True, analysis of various factors such as personality, diagnoses such as depression, post-traumatic stress etc can predict certain behaviors/choices better than blind guessing (random choices), yet far from 100% accuracy. Imagine if our understanding of Newtonian mechanics was so poor that we could predict the behavior of billiard balls 30% of the time! Would an inhabitant of that universe say that a billiard ball's behavior was determined or that they acted as if they "chose" what to do on their own? That's where we are with "determining" human behavior.
I agree with you about the burden of proof. But, you seem to now be saying that there is no proof of determinism, rather than saying there is positive proof of free will, which is what I thought I saw when I read:
LuckyR wrote: July 15th, 2018, 6:21 am ...all statistical data and analysis shows the opposite.
Watching humans tends to show they have free will, but the determinist will simply say that the many factors which go into behavior are too much for us to calculate and use to accurately predict behavior. I thought we had no experiments to show free will or determinism to be valid, and I guess this is still the case (and may always be).

I thought you had some new info, but I'll settle for your vote on the burden of proof.
Well, I meant that all statistical data and analysis of the prediction of human behavior is consistent with Free Will, but as you know that is not proof, since you can only prove a positive (Determinism), not a negative, that is the absence of Determinism (Free Will). That has nothing to do with me, that is the way logic works.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Free will

Post by Thinking critical »

chewybrian wrote: July 12th, 2018, 11:36 am
Thinking critical wrote: July 12th, 2018, 8:59 amFree will is the ability to act at our own discretion without the constraints of necessity.
You are, perhaps unintentionally, creating a straw man to argue against. What proponent of free will is saying that they are Zeus or Superman or Wonder Woman? I'm not even Aquaman! I'm just a guy who can decide to change the course of his life, and break bad habits and create new and better ones if I make the effort. We all have this super power.
I don't see the straw man?
The stoic mindset is difficult for people to get their head around if they have not both read and practiced stoic philosophy. Again I highly recommend you give this 5 minutes and jump in at about 25:10:
Thanks he is very clear in his explanation however I'm still not convinced?
Thinking critical wrote: July 12th, 2018, 8:59 amSo let me ask you a question, do you have ability to simply stop believing you have free will?
Yes!
I do not believe people can simply will themselves to believe a proposition is true if they think it is wrong, to do this would create a paradox, paradoxes can not be logically valid.

Clearly, many of us here have decided that they don't have free will despite their own experience to the contrary. Presumably, there must have been a time in their predetermined lives that they foolishly believed that they could decide what they wanted at the ice cream truck. Then, they 'grew up' and gave up notions of Santa Claus and free choice between creamsicles and rocket pops. I have made the choice to keep believing that I have free will.
The choice to believe something or not is contingent on reason, there is a process to explain what causes us to access knowledge from the unique angle we do which determines the conclusion we reach. As for the choice of ice cream, this is influenced by cravings, bio chemical processes cause emotional responses and motivation which encourages our decision to choose one product over another.
2-Think again about what free will really is. It is not the ability to control the outside world--AT ALL! It is the ability to make choices, to control your attitude, to interpret events as you wish (no matter what events may be), and to direct your desires and aversions. If you direct your efforts at the outside world, you may fail, or even create the opposite of the effect you intended. But, you have a great opportunity and a great chance of success if you act INTERNALLY. Change yourself and the way you interpret the world if you want to make progress. For (most) people, whose focus has always been on externals, these ideas may be difficult to accept.
What you have described is not free will, you are still trapped with in the constraints of necessity.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Free will

Post by chewybrian »

Thinking critical wrote: July 17th, 2018, 6:50 am
chewybrian wrote: July 12th, 2018, 11:36 am You are, perhaps unintentionally, creating a straw man to argue against.
I don't see the straw man?
chewybrian wrote: July 12th, 2018, 11:36 am2-Think again about what free will really is. It is not the ability to control the outside world--AT ALL! It is the ability to make choices, to control your attitude, to interpret events as you wish (no matter what events may be), and to direct your desires and aversions...
What you have described is not free will, you are still trapped with in the constraints of necessity.
That's the straw man, right there. Show me a quote from any sane advocate of free will who frames the argument in the way you set it out. Nobody is claiming they have super powers. Having a free will does not mean the universe will conform itself to my wishes. Other people are free to try to stop me, or to misinterpret anything I say :roll:. All sorts of bad luck might thwart my plans.

I'm free to try--that's it! That's free will.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Free will

Post by Thinking critical »

chewybrian wrote: July 17th, 2018, 1:32 pm That's the straw man, right there. Show me a quote from any sane advocate of free will who frames the argument in the way you set it out. Nobody is claiming they have super powers. Having a free will does not mean the universe will conform itself to my wishes. Other people are free to try to stop me, or to misinterpret anything I say :roll:. All sorts of bad luck might thwart my plans.

I'm free to try--that's it! That's free will.
You are misunderstanding me, every description of free will I have encountered insists that the cognitive experience of the subject is not contingent on a causal process, yet is free from a mechanism where a priori state determines and outcome.
You can't walk without putting one foot in front of the other, for this is the nature of walking.
How can you presume to intentionally and wilfully make a conscious effort to think/choose/decide without first utilising the brain functions of a brain that has been shaped and moulded by our past experiences? Thinking requires a causal process where one state or one frame of thought influences the next, for this is the nature of thinking.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Free will

Post by chewybrian »

Thinking critical wrote: July 18th, 2018, 6:22 amYou are misunderstanding me, every description of free will I have encountered insists that the cognitive experience of the subject is not contingent on a causal process, yet is free from a mechanism where a priori state determines and outcome.
You can't walk without putting one foot in front of the other, for this is the nature of walking.
How can you presume to intentionally and wilfully make a conscious effort to think/choose/decide without first utilising the brain functions of a brain that has been shaped and moulded by our past experiences? Thinking requires a causal process where one state or one frame of thought influences the next, for this is the nature of thinking.
I think rather you are misunderstanding what you have read, and pushing it to an illogical extreme never intended by the authors. Yes, you must be free to act to have a free will, but that means you are free to try to overcome influences, not that you act free from influences. A fat man and a thin man have different paths to tread if they decide to try to run the Boston Marathon.

Framing free will as free from any influence is a weird, abstract, theoretical view of events, like idealism. It might be interesting to think of the possibility, but it is not an intellectually honest position for most of us. Don't you agree that most people who believe in free will also assent to ideas like evolution or habit or addiction? These ideas are not exclusive of free will for anyone but an overactive philosopher. We all have our own unique set of roadblocks and corresponding level of difficulty for any choice we might take.

I was that fat guy when I decided to become an endurance cyclist. I might have been less likely than average to make that choice, and less likely to succeed, but I was not prevented from trying, and I accomplished the goals I set for myself. I am convinced that this event was a demonstration of free will, and I can't make a deterministic description of it without torturing the facts. Was I somehow born with a will destined to be weak until middle age, and then strong? Did I learn something new which drove me, but was unknown to me as a driver? Did I have an unknown brain injury that changed my behavior? Or, did reality simply match my subjective experience that I made a choice?
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Free will

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Thinking critical wrote: July 16th, 2018, 7:32 am
ThomasHobbes wrote: July 13th, 2018, 3:13 pm "... emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t..."

These are all determined by physical states of cerebral matter, without exception.
Wrong.
To be clear I said
Because the conscious experience is not solely contingent on matter, as I also said we have to consider the effects of emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t
You are over simplifying the problem of the relationship between the physical brain and the mind...
Thanks for your false duality.
You just do not understand your own prejudice.

"emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t.."
- None of these things do, or can exist without neural MATTER. The mind is what the neural matter does.
Please try to use your mind without a brain and see how far you get.
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Free will

Post by Thinking critical »

ThomasHobbes wrote: July 18th, 2018, 10:42 am "emotions, reasoning and cognitive errors e.c.t.."
- None of these things do, or can exist without neural MATTER. The mind is what the neural matter does.
Please try to use your mind without a brain and see how far you get.
You clearly don't grasp the nature of the properties of brain matter. There is no functionality within the brain of a dead person. Brain matter still exists, however if neuro activity ceases to function the mind will not emerge and neither will cognitive experiences.
I am not rejecting the correlation between the physical brain and it's function, conscious thought is clearly contingent on the neuro processing of brain matter.
What you are neglecting to consider is the WHY, why do synapses interact between neurons down specific pathways in the patterns that they do? This after all is why the individual percieves their own unique subjective reality, it is not because their brains are physically different, it's because their neurons fire differently.

If conscious expressions such as emotions and reason were determined purely from the physical states of conscious matter as you insist, the consequences would deem all areas of human psychology redundant. There is substantial evidence to prove that experiences such as trauma, will alter mental states. The faculties of the mind can be altered mentally through learning and experience resulting in new neurological pathways or neuro networking (expanding the mind) this being the relationship between the mind and the brain I was speaking of.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021