Welcome to the Philosophy Forums! If you already are a member, please log in. If you are not a member, please join the forums now. It's completely free, and all viewpoints are welcome.
| View previous topic :: View next topic :: |
pjkeeley
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 635
|
Post: #1  Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:03 pm Post subject: Can free-will/determinism be anything other than universal? |
  |
|
|
| At least one user has posted comments alluding to a belief that they have free-will, but that other users on the forum might not. I'm assuming from how these posts were worded that this belief goes beyond solipsism, and if so, let us for the purposes of this discussion assume that other minds do exist, but that some minds have free-will and others do not. How is this possible? By what explanation could free-will or determinism be anything other than universal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Belinda
Contributor
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 3850
|
| Post: #2 Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
What if some chosen people were 'favoured'  by God with Free Will, and others were not so favoured?
This presupposes God, but Free Will also always presupposes either God or some other other-worldly influence.
_________________
Socialist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wanabe
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE
|
| Post: #3 Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm one of those, maybe the those. fyi if people want to call me out on something directly PLEASE do so.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All are capable of free will, it is merely an exercise. If one exercises more, their free will is stronger. If one does not exercise their free will, they don't try to have any, because they THINK its not possible; than of course they have "none"(extremely little).
You can be a log floating down stream or a salmon swimming up
The universe is both deterministic and obedient to free will. Free will may purely be a matter of faith, but not necessarily in god, belinda. Is self a worldly influence?
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meleagar
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 1475
|
| Post: #4 Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:18 am Post subject: Re: Can free-will/determinism be anything other than univers |
|
|
|
| pjkeeley wrote: |
| At least one user has posted comments alluding to a belief that they have free-will, but that other users on the forum might not. I'm assuming from how these posts were worded that this belief goes beyond solipsism, and if so, let us for the purposes of this discussion assume that other minds do exist, but that some minds have free-will and others do not. How is this possible? By what explanation could free-will or determinism be anything other than universal? |
Well, why should free will or determinism be universals?
Since I'm the only person I know that holds the belief that free will exists, but that not all humans have it, I'll post my view here. I was thinking about starting a thread on it anyway.
First, how I define free will: the ability to deliberately will a goal or purpose free from constraint by physical, divine or other influence. Note that under my definition free will is not free action; nor does it assert that free will is not under any influence, but that it is not constrained by such influences.
Also, from my perspective, free will is a necessary axiom in logic; without the capacity to independently and deliberately attempt to discern or make true statements, then meaningful discourse is impossible. If one is constrained to believing and uttering only that which physical sequences of cause and effect result in, then one could be uttering pure nonsense while believing it was logically sound, and not be capable of understanding this because they have no locus of independence from physical causation to independently review their statements or argument.
I give the above logical perspective because it is from that which I present the argument that some humans in fact do not have free will, because they argue nonsensical, incoherent things and have no capacity to recognize they are doing so; this is never more evident than when one argues that they do not have free will (in the philosophically idealistic sense).
If they do not have free will, and believed this, then surely they recognize that those they are arguing with do not have the free will resources by which to understand the superiority of their argument, so why are they arguing? People will believe whatever accumulative sequences of physical cause and effect make them believe; they are "programmed", so to speak, by accumulated cause and effect. Why argue with them as if they are capable of independently assessing your argument?
Further, if one only believes what they believe because they are "programmed" to believe it, and obviously people believe all sorts of contradictory things, then the system of programming - nature, physics, biology - doesn't necessarily produce true beliefs; nor do people who believe untrue beliefs believe them any less certainly than those who might believe true beliefs. So, nature, physics and biology are as apt to produce false beliefs as they are to produce true ones (perhaps more apt); so the person who argues that there is no free will might be "programmed" to believe a false belief him- or herself.
Further, there is no recourse under the "programmed" (or constrained) state to indemnify oneself against false beliefs, because they cannot go "outside of" their programming in order to evaluate it. Therefore, they have no basis by which to even argue that free will doesn't exist, because for all they know they've been programmed to believe false things.
So, not only is there no reason to argue that there is no free will, but there is no basis by which it can be argued coherently.
Further, many humans state that they cannot help but believe what they believe; i.e., they do not choose their beliefs, but rather they are forced to believe things because logic or evidence dictates. Obviously, this is not a free will situation; if you cannot deliberately order your own beliefs; then since behavior, thought and habit are directed largely (or perhaps entirely) by what we believe to be real, then one is simply the mechanism, the tool, the puppet of their system of how true beliefs are derived.
If one holds that true beliefs are derived by reading the Bible, or by an application of logic (with whatever premises they hold to be axiomatic), and are incapable of believing anything other than what those systems yield, then they do not have free will; they cannot intentionalize a goal or direction not authorized by their system of belief justification; their deliberacy is constrained, not just influenced.
Having free will, I could choose to believe that humans have free will, or that they do not; those were the only options I had available at the time, but I didn't find them satisfactory; I intentionalized, or deliberately pursued some concept of humans that provided me with a means of enjoying them more. Seeing them as all having free will often frustrated me and would generate intolerance or anger; seeing them as all without free will lent itself to deterministic nihilism and a loss of motivation or consideration and love for them. I sought an alternative, a choice that wasn't offered by current paradigms.
That intention manifested a third choice; that some humans have free will, and others are NPC's (non-player characters), entities without free will but, just as they themselves often asserted, simply programs generated by accumulated physical sequences of cause and effect - or, as entities manifested solely for interaction with free will entities, like in a dream or a game.
This outlook has provided me with a means of greatly enjoying my experience that did not exist under the other two options.
BTW, using free will, my deliberately chosen means of arriving at beliefs is "whatever seems to generate the best, most durable enjoyment of my existence"; those beliefs don't have to be evidenced, nor do they have to be logically arguable (although some can be); but they do have to produce practical results.
This is why I believe in God, what I believe that god to "be"; why I believe in spiritual realms and entities, etc.; I believe what I wish in order to maximize my enjoyment potential, not because I consider those things to actually be "true" in any logical sense or by examination of the evidence. If they fail to generate enjoyment, then I can move to a different belief.
If you're not free to create your own beliefs, and dismiss them, then you do not have free will, because free will is defined (above) by the lack of constraint in deliberately choosing goals or intended paths; a belief system of what one considers to be "true" constrains our goals and intended paths according to what we consider to be true.
I don't think it can be argued that all humans have free will outside of some theological axiom; all humans don't have color sight; all humans don't have hearing; all humans don't have the IQ necessary to be capable of personal responsibility; all humans don't have equal locomotive or physical abilities; why should all humans have free will?
Especially when it is fairly obvious that many do not.
_________________
http://spiritualintelligentdesign.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjkeeley
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 635
|
| Post: #5 Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Intriguing thoughts, Meleagar. Interesting particularly that you say you choose your beliefs based at least in part on their psychological benefits. In my own experience, I derive the optimum psychological benefit from believing what I perceive to be the cold hard truth, so to speak. Even if it means initially exposing myself to depressing or uncomfortable feelings, I find repose when I am able to come to terms with something that in the end seems right. To me this acceptance feels much better than the niggling frustration and doubt I experience when I feel as though my beliefs are inconsistent or false; I get the sense that I cling to them only because they are of comfort to me at times when I don't feel like confronting reality. But, ours are just two different personal accounts. I am certainly not suggesting you are wrong to think as you do.
I for one couldn't care less about the question of free-will. I just don't see why it is so important that others insist on answering it one way or the other, especially given that there are much more pressing problems in philosophy that have a direct effect on how we live our lives. If I have no free-will, I fail to see how it would affect how I live my life. Determinism cannot be a lifestyle. The feeling of free-will holds sway, whether it is an illusion or not. A determinist simply cannot rely on her supposed lack of free-will when faced with a choice: if a waiter asks a determinist for her order, she can't reply that she is a determinist and as such intends to simply wait and see what she is going to decide. If she does then absolutely nothing will happen, aside from getting a funny look from the waiter. It is a real-world situation: she will have to act in some way or other, and whether it was free-will or determinism that caused the act is of significance only to stuffy academics. The real world prevails. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Belinda
Contributor
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 3850
|
| Post: #6 Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I agree ,PJK. I think the philososophic question of Free Will straddles ethics and metaphysics. It's actually more important within ethics than within metaphysics because Free Will implies absolute responsibility. The more liberal and deterministic the judge, the less the judge(or the legal system) will apportion culpability to the subject.The more the judge or the legal system thinks that the subject is entirely responsible for her actions, the more the judge or the system will punish.
Ethics within Christianity and Islam depend upon Free Will. If persons have no Free Will no just God can judge them as bad people. The more liberal sort of Christians narrow the categories within which a person is deemed to be free of will so the God of liberals is less punitive. Or more liberal Christians will make the historical Jesus more important than a punitive Jehovah so that forgiveness in this life is based upon determinism."He couldn't really help it because he had incompetent parents" etc.
I am writing about Free Will as a religious ethics matter and a legal matter because Free Will belief is practically involved with religious ethics and with law.(Laws follow upon some moral system or other)
Free Will debate is important therefore within ethics but within metaphysics is of adademic interest only.
_________________
Socialist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meleagar
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 1475
|
| Post: #7 Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| pjkeeley wrote: |
I for one couldn't care less about the question of free-will.
It is a real-world situation: she will have to act in some way or other, and whether it was free-will or determinism that caused the act is of significance only to stuffy academics. The real world prevails.
|
As I said before: unless I think a belief has practical value for me, I don't even bother with it; perhaps that is where you are with free will. You don't think there is any practical value in the argument, since it seems everyone behaves as if they have it, and as if others have it, and we operate within the practical limitations that we do.
However, I gave the concept of free will more attention after reading some John Wheeler, David Bohm, and some popularized consciousness/quantum physics material, and about the delayed-choice experiments. I hypothesized that if humans have a kind of transcendent free will based on a wave-entanglement "wholeness" or "oneness" with all potential, and if consciousness determines the observed locations and qualities of subatomic phenomena from near-infinite potential, thus collapsing local phenomena into actualized states through intentional acts of observation, then free will might be a kind of transcendent observer that actually creates its experiential reality.
Another avenue of scientific thought, that which hypothesizes the existence of Boltzmann Brains, generates a similar consequence of mind-created realities. Not solipisim, but rather orchestrations of interacting potentials between free-will entities that provides a far different kind of reality than what is generally thought to exist.
Now, throughout my life I had noticed some very odd occurrences that always intrigued me, but which didn't offer me any practical methodology for pursuing a benefit from those events; experiences that seemed to me to be inexplicable from the normative model of physical reality. However, this reading into quantum theory and how it might relate to consciousness gave me an idea for practical applications at least to test to see if I could derive any meaningful benefit.
My experiments were by my deliberate willing of reality, through symbolic visualization and other manifestation techniques, from the subatomic up, and even into the past (delayed choice experiment), to reorder itself into patterns that provided me and those I loved with joy, happiness, love, success, motivation, interest, excitement, etc.
The transformation that occurred was remarkable, and that is a profound understatement. Not only did my life transform, the lives of everyone around me transformed, in every meaningful sense. Not only did inexplicable, unbelievable events turn in my favor, they seemed to be entirely orchestrated for no reason other than my benefit, and the benefit of those around me. My life as it has unfolded since undertaking this experience is a lot like an enjoyable delusion or dream.
In fact, my life became so much like a great delusion or dream that I had to reorganize my entire outlook on existence and self in order to accommodate what I actually perceived happening around me and to me.
Now of course, all this could simply be coincidence or an actual delusion; but the take-home point is this: what if free will actually matters, and what if we do (well, those of us with free will) actually "collapse" potential realities into actuality, as some suggest, based on the nature, method or quality of our observation? What if one's intention, how they deliberate choose to perceive, interpret, and pursue their experience affects what they experience in deep and profound ways?
If so, then free will not only matters, but it is of singular importance, because how we intend ourselves to exist, how we perceive and observe our existence, might actually be creating not only the world around us, but the very personality and identiy that we see ourselves as on that stage.
So yes, belief in free will is irrelevant if it is actually irrelevant; however, it also might be of profound practical importance. Several years ago, I gave my free will experiment a few minutes a day of my time, 3-4 days a week just to see if I would notice any benefit; needless to say, I did.
Now, of course I'm not saying I have any evidence I can distribute other than anecdotal, nor do I claim this would work for everyone (although testimonials of the success of such manifestation techniques can be easily found across the internet and other media); I'm just posing the same question one might pose to anyone that believed reality was a certain way; what if you're wrong?
You see, if I'm wrong, and if I'm just experiencing a delusion or a dream, I'm entirely okay with that; it doesn't matter to me, because what matters to me is what I actually experience, not whether or not I'm experiencing some verifiable "reality" or "truth". However, I suggest that if my perspective is a functionable model, and if it also applies to you, then your intention of finding or approximating real truths (which you enjoy and find satisfaction doing) requires an orchestration of your personality-self and your contextual world so that finding or approximating "real" truths can be accomplished; thus you must exist a certain way in a certain experiential framework.
If you get added value by adopting "truths" even if they are unenjoyable, then my framework dictates that you will find such unenjoyable truths (and enjoy them in a different way), because of your intention. Similarly, a Christian will find themselves in experiences that support their observational identity; so will a muslim, so will an atheist, and so will I.
Of course, not everyone (and probably very few) would enjoy such an experience, because most people have identities based on truth, not on enjoyment; they see enjoyment as rather trivial compared to truth. Nothing right or wrong in that; it would just necessarily order a different framework for experience, one where free will was necessarily subordinant to, and constrained by, "true" parameters of existence.
And thus, they wouldn't have free will, because their free will would be constrained by existential "truths". In such a situation, of course, debate about free will would be academic or irrelevant, because it wouldn't be all that meaningful even if it did exist; we would all be victims of circumstance to a great degree, and our free will input would just be marginal variance and influence within that framework.
_________________
http://spiritualintelligentdesign.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wanabe
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE
|
| Post: #8 Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Meleagar,
We'll get along just fine. Solid posts.
Curious though, do you think that all are capable of free will?
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
athena
Contributor
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 857
|
| Post: #9 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| wanabe wrote: |
I'm one of those, maybe the those. fyi if people want to call me out on something directly PLEASE do so.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All are capable of free will, it is merely an exercise. If one exercises more, their free will is stronger. If one does not exercise their free will, they don't try to have any, because they THINK its not possible; than of course they have "none"(extremely little).
You can be a log floating down stream or a salmon swimming up
The universe is both deterministic and obedient to free will. Free will may purely be a matter of faith, but not necessarily in god, belinda. Is self a worldly influence? |
I think you are correct about the need to practice free will, and the possibility of being so weak in the exercise of free will, that a person could be said lacking in free will. One can be possessed by thoughts of weakness and being a victim, and manifest this in one's life.
I am very concerned about the socialization I am witnessing in a grade school. These children are being socialized in such a way as to make them perfect followers of someone like Hitler. All around the school are signs about children's rights, but in practice many of the school staff behave like tyrants who deny children of all rights, and it is the mass psychology of this reality that is so frightening. To not comply with the dictates of a staff person, is to not "fit in". I wish everyone could see what I am witnessing and check out my perception of what is being done to the children. I do not believe these children will develop into strong willed people, but will remain dependent on authority above them.
My answer to this question "Curious though, do you think that all are capable of free will?" is- it depends on how soon a child becomes rebellious, and how well that works for the child. Rebellion is an important part of becoming independent, and being self willed.
I don't think a God decides who will or will not have self will. The gods might test us, and many will decline, while a few will accept the challenge and become heroes. I think more will become heroes if they are taught how to be heroes, instead of conditioned to be obedient sheep.
Last edited by athena on Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:25 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wanabe
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE
|
| Post: #10 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm glad we agree. I don't think free will is locked in at child hood; like some Freudian ideal. One can 'begin' at any time.
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
athena
Contributor
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 857
|
| Post: #11 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| wanabe wrote: |
| I'm glad we agree. I don't think free will is locked in at child hood; like some Freudian ideal. One can 'begin' at any time. |
Oh, yes, I agree with you, a person can learn how to strengthen his/her self will later in life, but the conditions of when and how this happens are important. It is also important to know what encourages children to develop a strong will and what undermines their ability to do so. Just because they might figure out how to undo the damage 50 years later, we should not ignore how this damage occurs in the first place.
Also, we might practice greater awareness of cultural differences and our cultural choices. Some cultures promote cooperation over individuality and aggressiveness, and others put the priority on being independent and aggressive.
Until recently, some towns had laws condoning husbands hitting their wives, and economic conditions made it very difficult for a woman to have a decent standard of living without a man. Until recently we socialized male and females differently, and expected women to be passive and obedient. Our social rules have changed, and the adjustment to change has not been easy for some. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meleagar
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 1475
|
| Post: #12 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| wanabe wrote: |
Meleagar,
We'll get along just fine. Solid posts.
Curious though, do you think that all are capable of free will? |
I work with facts (neutral descriptions of actual experience using simple labels), which I accept at face value (as much as possible) and beliefs, which are interpretations of facts into models.
The fact is that I don't know if anyone else has free will; the fact is that some appear to me to have free will, and some do not; the fact is that at one time I (loosely-defined "I" there) didn't have free will, and now I do. So, my model is that it might be possible for others who do not have free will to attain it. I don't extrapolate my models into "truths" such as "everyone is capable of having free will" because, frankly, I don't see how such universal generalizations are going to increase my enjoyment of life.
I mean, why should I care if they can gain free will or not? What difference would it make to me? If it's not going to make a practical difference in my life, why adopt a belief about it? Further, if those people could gain free will, how does that benefit me?
Further, given that the potential for infinite variant universes exist, it may be that all I'm seeing of others are non-free-will facets or images of some entity that does have free will in some other universe, a facet generated by my own psychology or quantum computer mind from their "real" template.
Even in the macro, "normative" world, we generally only interpret others as the structure of our own mind dictates, and different people can interpret the same person entirely differently depending on their personal psychology; if the mind is a kind of quantum computer, then all I "see" or experience of others is a deep interpretation generated largely by the state of my own nature.
Oh, what an entangled web we weave, when first we choose what to perceive.
I choose to see those people as not having free will because it relieves me of a structure I have no desire to operate under; it relieves them of responsibility for their acts, and so I can enjoy them more because they don't frustrate, baffle, anger or irritate me.
_________________
http://spiritualintelligentdesign.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wanabe
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE
|
| Post: #13 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
“why should I care if they can gain free will or not?”(Meleagar) Do you think having free will has helped you(to save some time I'm going to make some assumptions, I know you will correct me if I'm wrong)-(It must, you said it made you 'happy' when you willed good for others in your anecdote)? If yes than, Do you think that to some degree you have benefited the world, at least temporarily? If yes, if others gained free will would it not be possible that they could benefit them selves, and the world? Is that not a 'good' thing? Wouldn't that be a reason one should (maybe you would prefer "can care?") care? If practicality is your main concern(I don't think it is), why are you hear? philosophy is 'historically' the long road to practicality.
I find the rest of the post agreeable enough(since we are discussing free will).
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meleagar
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 1475
|
| Post: #14 Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Practicality is not my main concern; enjoying my existence is. Practicality is just my filter by which I decide what to direct my attention to when it comes to pursuing my enjoyment, and in sorting my beliefs. Others having free will, or not, is irrelevant to my enjoyment of my experience.
Since I consider myself, everyone else, and the world perfect as-is, I don't think in terms of "benefitting" others or the world.
I enjoy discussing philosophy and it keeps my mind tuned and focused.
_________________
http://spiritualintelligentdesign.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Belinda
Contributor
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 3850
|
| Post: #15 Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| First, how I define free will: the ability to deliberately will a goal or purpose free from constraint by physical, divine or other influence. Note that under my definition free will is not free action; nor does it assert that free will is not under any influence, but that it is not constrained by such influences. |
Meleagar#4 So do I , Meleagar.
I agree with all in this paragraph. Once I start to think of constraints upon your actions I think of what genes you inherited, that gave you certain personality probabilities and certain physiology probabilities, that constrian you.
Then I think of the people who reared you, parents, teachers, peer group, siblings etc. and their influences that were all outside of your control.
Then I think of other things that happened to you,a lucky win when gambling, a childhood fever and its aftermath, meeting an attractive person as friend or spouse, a road traffic accident, getting into a good school,being in the path of a tornado, becoming indoctrinated with some superstition (Delete and add to as required.)
These are only illustrations of the fact that what happens to you happens to you.On the other hand you are a rational thinker, you seem to have your passions under control, you live in a free country,so you have the ability , unless there is something about you I cannot guess, to be about as free as anyone can be free. However there is not room in this description for the absolute origination of your thoughts,and actions, only the moderation and occasional transcendence of them by means of your rationality and self control.The very rationality and self control that you have, the morality you have learned, were all outside of your control, and due to some combination of nature and nurture.
If, on the other hand, God did give humans, and only humans, Free Will, then how do you choose what to do? Do you guess or intuit perhaps after praying, or do you think and decide according to the authority of priest or holy Book?
_________________
Socialist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
