Free will.

[shunyadragon]

Then you deny the teaching of your religion that clearly says that we (humans) receive our physical nature from Adam. And that Adam had neither father or mother. So Adam was a special creation, not in the lineage of the humans that came before and we get our physical nature from Adam.

Again, again, again and again . . . Abdu'l baha is only referring ONLY to the dispensation of Adam. Yes, Adam is a special Creation that has been acknowledged many many times. In all the dispensation over hundreds of thousands of years we get our physical nature for the first Adam of that dispensation. Our physical nature for the many millennia remains the Creation of God through the manifestations of God.

[shunyadragon]

So all our choices are determined. Then in what way are they free? How can they be both determined and free if all our choices are fixed by the laws of nature?

. . . because it is the possible range of choices that are limited by natural law, just as all possible outcomes of events in the chain of events are limited by natural law.

[seer]

Again, again, again and again . . . Abdu'l baha is only referring ONLY to the dispensation of Adam. Yes, Adam is a special Creation that has been acknowledged many many times. In all the dispensation over hundreds of thousands of years we get our physical nature for the first Adam of that dispensation. Our physical nature for the many millennia remains the Creation of God through the manifestations of God.

Good so you agree that all we humans are descendants of one man - Adam. And that we did not get our physical nature from the beings (humans or otherwise) that came before Adam. So since Adam was not biologically connected to those past beings (he was a special creation without father or mother) we are not biologically related to them (humans or otherwise) either.

[seer]

. . . because it is the possible range of choices that are limited by natural law, just as all possible outcomes of events in the chain of events are limited by natural law.

But then, no matter the possible outcomes, it is natural law that is determining our choices. Shuny, how is free will compatible with that?

[JimL]

Yes it’s deterministic but the decisions we make under the illusion of free will seem to be our own, undetermined choices and we make them as if they were ‘free-will’ decisions, even though (if we think about it at all) we intellectually acknowledge that they can’t be. This does not necessarily mean we have no influence on the future and its events. But such influence depends upon on present circumstances and the past events lodged in our subconscious and how they influence our conscious minds. How could it be otherwise?

Not sure that answers the question exactly Tass. The point I was trying to make was that it seems we have the ability to consciously suppress subconscious activity, i.e. thoughts/directives. We do this whenever we meditate, we consciously suppress subconscious thoughts from entering our consciousness. I'm finding it difficult to reconcile consciousness as naught but an after effect of our subconscious thoughts/directives, when in fact we are able to consciously suppress those very subconscious thoughts and or directives from even entering our awareness.

[shunyadragon]

Good so you agree that all we humans are descendants of one man - Adam. And that we did not get our physical nature from the beings (humans or otherwise) that came before Adam. So since Adam was not biologically connected to those past beings (he was a special creation without father or mother) we are not biologically related to them (humans or otherwise) either.

No

[shunyadragon]

But then, no matter the possible outcomes, it is natural law that is determining our choices. Shuny, how is free will compatible with that?

. . . because we have possible choices within the alternatives 'determined' by natural law.

[seer]

. . . because we have possible choices within the alternatives 'determined' by natural law.

But all our possible choices are still determined. That is not free in any sense of the word Shuny.

[seer]

No

What are you saying no to? That Adam if the father of mankind? Because if he is, and was created without a father and mother, then we have no genetic connection with the humans or creatures that went before. Where exactly am I wrong.

[JimL]

. . . because we have possible choices within the alternatives 'determined' by natural law.

The existence of possible choices 'determined by natural law', and our ability to freely choose either of them, are two different things Shunya. Unless we are free to choose, then it doesn't matter how many possible choices exist 'determined by natural law.'

[Tassman]

Not sure that answers the question exactly Tass. The point I was trying to make was that it seems we have the ability to consciously suppress subconscious activity, i.e. thoughts/directives. We do this whenever we meditate, we consciously suppress subconscious thoughts from entering our consciousness.

I understand what you’re saying. But even though you consciously suppress your subconscious activity it surely it must be lurking in there somewhere having an effect of which you’re unaware.

I'm finding it difficult to reconcile consciousness as naught but an after effect of our subconscious thoughts/directives, when in fact we are able to consciously suppress those very subconscious thoughts and or directives from even entering our awareness.

But what are you able to achieve when you’re in this state of unawareness?

[shunyadragon]

But all our possible choices are still determined. That is not free in any sense of the word Shuny.

No they are not, the range of possible choices is determined, but it does not limit the possible choices to only one, nor are the outcome of any natural events limited to only one outcome. We indeed potentially have free will, but of course, we cannot take off and fly by flapping our arms regardless of how hard we try.

[seer]

No they are not, the range of possible choices is determined, but it does not limit the possible choices to only one, nor are the outcome of any natural events limited to only one outcome. We indeed potentially have free will, but of course, we cannot take off and fly by flapping our arms regardless of how hard we try.

That does not make sense Shuny, even if there is more than one possible outcome, whatever the outcome is, is still fully determined by the laws of nature as you said. There is no free will in that picture, if you think there is you have a strange idea on what constitutes freedom.

[shunyadragon]

That does not make sense Shuny, even if there is more than one possible outcome, whatever the outcome is, is still fully determined by the laws of nature as you said. There is no free will in that picture, if you think there is you have a strange idea on what constitutes freedom.

It makes perfect sense seer, because that is the reality of the world the way it is regardless of how you try and 'force fit' into your agenda and world view.

[seer]

It makes perfect sense seer, because that is the reality of the world the way it is regardless of how you try and 'force fit' into your agenda and world view.

Shuny, just because there are possible outcomes doesn't mean that each actual choice is not fully determined. JimL understands that, and he doesn't have my agenda. Again Shuny, if my actual choice is determined, where does free will come in? In what way am I free if the "laws of nature" determine my choices?