Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 228

Thread: Free will.

  1. #21
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,581
    Amen (Given)
    1238
    Amen (Received)
    4340
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Yes, you have been arguing this point, but always, I believe, from the perspective of how it "feels" to you, or that its what you believe. That kind of argument is insufficient in derailing the deterministic, free will is an illusion argument, which is based on physics, simply because that kind of argument isn't based on anything other than "feelings." We all "feel" as though we have free will, but there seems to have been no evidence that could validate those "feelings" we have of freedom to be correct. What I'm really interested in now is what the believers in determinism think, or how they might argue against free will when in meditation it seems as though it, i.e. a free and conscious will, can be summoned in order to battle with and defeat the unconscious activity of the brain?
    Jim, I really feel that what goes on in my head actually corresponds to reality. I can not prove that logically or empirically. I feel that other minds, similar to mine, exist, I can not prove that logically or empirically. I believe that I'm self-aware - I can not prove that that isn't an illusion.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  2. #22
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,014
    Amen (Given)
    1279
    Amen (Received)
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    I just defined libertarian free will, are you saying that Compatibilism supports this?
    No, and I qualified it in response. . . . no you did not explicitly define 'libertarian free will,' nor did I accept your post without qualification. Careful,you proposed the word 'most' which is a vague 'subjective' determination as to how much 'free will' humans can express in their decision making process.

    Again, I nor Compatibilism as defined accept your view of 'libertarian free will.' What you described is too vague.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-13-2017 at 06:22 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  3. #23
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,581
    Amen (Given)
    1238
    Amen (Received)
    4340
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    No, and I qualified it in response. . . . no you did not explicitly define 'libertarian free will,' nor did I accept your post without qualification. Careful,you proposed the word 'most' which is a vague 'subjective' determination as to how much 'free will' humans can express in their decision making process.

    Again, I nor Compatibilism as defined accept your view of 'libertarian free will.' What you described is too vague.
    Libertarian free will is defined as the power of contrary choice, that is what it is. So either that is compatible with Compatibilism or it is not.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  4. #24
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,014
    Amen (Given)
    1279
    Amen (Received)
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Libertarian free will is defined as the power of contrary choice, that is what it is. So either that is compatible with Compatibilism or it is not.
    Your simplistic statement does not define 'libertarian free will.' and of course there is more to it than that.

    The problem is that you define libertarian free will as being 'most' decisions made be an individual can be known by the individual as contrary decisions to all possible alternative decisions. No this is NOT what the philosophy of compatibilism supports as defined in the reference.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-13-2017 at 07:08 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  5. #25
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,581
    Amen (Given)
    1238
    Amen (Received)
    4340
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Your simplistic statement does not define 'libertarian free will.' and of course there is more to it than that.
    Actually it does :Libertarianism holds onto a concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert..._(metaphysics)

    So yes, there may be more to Libertarian free will but at it's core it requires the power of contrary choice


    The problem is that you define libertarian free will as being 'most' decisions made be an individual can be known by the individual as contrary decisions to all possible alternative decisions. No this is NOT what the philosophy of compatibilism supports as defined in the reference.
    Compatibilism defines free will as the ability to act according to our nature, apart from external influence. But a dog can do that, and it is all still determined. Redefining the meaning of free will does nothing to change the fact that our our acts are still determined by antecedent conditions.

    But again Shuny, I asked a while back - please give us your definition of free will.
    Last edited by seer; 04-14-2017 at 04:43 AM.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  6. #26
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    10,402
    Amen (Given)
    1284
    Amen (Received)
    1285
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Jim, I really feel that what goes on in my head actually corresponds to reality. I can not prove that logically or empirically. I feel that other minds, similar to mine, exist, I can not prove that logically or empirically. I believe that I'm self-aware - I can not prove that that isn't an illusion.
    Yes, and you really feel as though you have free will, but really feeling or believing a thing isn't itself evidence of its truth. What I would like is the opinion of some of the determinists here who say that consciousness is only an after effect of our unconscious activity. My point in the OP is that consciousness can actually be utilized to suppress the seemingly determined unconscious activity of the brain, and thus can not be said to only be an after affect of that activity. Consciousness can be the cause of action, rather than just the resulting after effect of unconscious activity, and if that is so, does that consciousness then, that ability we have to control the unconscious, evince in us the emergence of a freedom from it, a freedom from our otherwise determined natures?

  7. #27
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,014
    Amen (Given)
    1279
    Amen (Received)
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Compatibilism defines free will as the ability to act according to our nature, apart from external influence. But a dog can do that, and it is all still determined. Redefining the meaning of free will does nothing to change the fact that our our acts are still determined by antecedent conditions.

    But again Shuny, I asked a while back - please give us your definition of free will.
    I do not believe the bold above is not necessarily a part of the definition for Compatibilism. It is most definitely not apart of the definition I gave. The following is the definition for free will I support.

    Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/#FreWil


    1.1 Free Will
    It would be misleading to specify a strict definition of free will since in the philosophical work devoted to this notion there is probably no single concept of it. For the most part, what philosophers working on this issue have been hunting for is a feature of agency that is necessary for persons to be morally responsible for their conduct.[1] Different attempts to articulate the conditions for moral responsibility will yield different accounts of the sort of agency required to satisfy those conditions. What we need as a starting point is a malleable notion that focuses upon special features of persons as agents. As a theory-neutral point of departure, then, free will can be defined as the unique ability of persons to exercise control over their conduct in the manner necessary for moral responsibility.[2] Clearly, this definition is too lean when taken as an endpoint; the hard philosophical work is about how best to develop this special kind of control.

    © Copyright Original Source



    The problem is 'apart from external influence.' This is a difficult if not an impossible provision to demonstrate. Our whole existence is an integral part of 'external influences.' First and foremost, it would be impossible to get around the external influence of natural law.

    I do add another aspect of free will that 'conditions of moral responsibility' does not address. We make decisions every day of our lives within a range of possible choices that could possibly constitute free will choices. Some of these choices may be actually meaningful of future consequence concerning future chains of cause and effect outcomes, but most are just mundane choices that likely have no future consequence.

    The concept of 'contrary choice' is over rated. It simply means a choice is made contrary 'diametrically opposed' to other possible choices. The only proviso in determinism, and compatibilism is that contrary choices cannot by contrary to natural law. It should be understood that the human assessment of what are 'free will' or contrary choices is subject to our anecdotal and subjective judgement, and of course our bias as to what 'free will' is.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-14-2017 at 06:27 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  8. #28
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,581
    Amen (Given)
    1238
    Amen (Received)
    4340
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    I do not believe the bold above is not necessarily a part of the definition for Compatibilism. It is most definitely not apart of the definition I gave. The following is the definition for free will I support.

    Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/#FreWil


    1.1 Free Will
    It would be misleading to specify a strict definition of free will since in the philosophical work devoted to this notion there is probably no single concept of it. For the most part, what philosophers working on this issue have been hunting for is a feature of agency that is necessary for persons to be morally responsible for their conduct.[1] Different attempts to articulate the conditions for moral responsibility will yield different accounts of the sort of agency required to satisfy those conditions. What we need as a starting point is a malleable notion that focuses upon special features of persons as agents. As a theory-neutral point of departure, then, free will can be defined as the unique ability of persons to exercise control over their conduct in the manner necessary for moral responsibility.[2] Clearly, this definition is too lean when taken as an endpoint; the hard philosophical work is about how best to develop this special kind of control.

    © Copyright Original Source



    The problem is 'apart from external influence.' This is a difficult if not an impossible provision to demonstrate. Our whole existence is an integral part of 'external influences.' First and foremost, it would be impossible to get around the external influence of natural law.

    I do add another aspect of free will that 'conditions of moral responsibility' does not address. We make decisions every day of our lives within a range of possible choices that could possibly constitute free will choices. Some of these choices may be actually meaningful of future consequence concerning future chains of cause and effect outcomes, but most are just mundane choices that likely have no future consequence.

    The concept of 'contrary choice' is over rated. It simply means a choice is made contrary 'diametrically opposed' to other possible choices. The only proviso in determinism, and compatibilism is that contrary choices cannot by contrary to natural law. It should be understood that the human assessment of what are 'free will' or contrary choices is subject to our anecdotal and subjective judgement, and of course our bias as to what 'free will' is.
    Shuny, I gave you a clear definition of LFW, and what do you offer? Are you admitting that you have no clear definition? If that is the case then you can not claim that Determinism is compatible with human freedom since you can not even define what free will is
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  9. #29
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,014
    Amen (Given)
    1279
    Amen (Received)
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Shuny, I gave you a clear definition of LFW, and what do you offer?
    No you did not.

    Are you admitting that you have no clear definition? If that is the case then you can not claim that Determinism is compatible with human freedom.
    My references are clear, specific and from good academic sources. I am arguing for the possibility of compatibilism, and not causal nor classical determinism. I gave academic sources support that.

    since you can not even define what free will is
    My definition is from a reliable academic source, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

    You actually have not responded coherently to my post.

    I await coherent responses from JimL and others.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-14-2017 at 11:46 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  10. #30
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,581
    Amen (Given)
    1238
    Amen (Received)
    4340
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    No you did not.
    That is a falsehhod Shuny, I certainly did:

    Actually it does :Libertarianism holds onto a concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert..._(metaphysics)


    My references are clear, specific and from good academic sources. I am arguing for the possibility of compatibilism, and not causal nor classical determinism. I gave academic sources support that.



    My definition is from a reliable academic source, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

    You actually have not responded coherently to my post.

    Another falsehood Shuny, there was no clear definition of free will in your quote. So I will ask for the third time: please offer a definition of FREE WILL. And stop hiding behind "academic sources" that you don't even understand.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •