Must a creature have a completely free will? If not is it still responsible for it's actions? See if you can answer that with logical thought-type evidence and the other related questions here: http://eternian.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/the-riddle-of-free-will
Free will and responsiblity for actions...
- Thread starter fat_frank
- Start date
My favorite part. I edited out the actual choice because it doesn't matter. The question of a God being responsible for its actions seems to be the underlying theme here. The consensus would be yes, but an insane god? Interesting take, something I never considered ..... dammit!
It is my view that the universe is deterministic, thus there is no such thing as free will.
Cultural evolution has created a society that is functional by holding individuals responsible for their actions. We live with the illusion of free will, and must organize our society on the premise that free will exists, to maintain order.
Cultural evolution has created a society that is functional by holding individuals responsible for their actions. We live with the illusion of free will, and must organize our society on the premise that free will exists, to maintain order.
I cant emagine a situaton in which a person has any free-will... much less "completely free will"... so no... i dont no of anyone who is responsible for ther actons.!!!
If Holey-Bible God esisted... he coud be insane or a monster... but not even he coud have free will sinse hes all-knowin.!!!
An improvment woud be... that society understood that free will is an illusion... an even tho people woud still be held responsible for ther actons... it woud also be understood that no one deserves punishment.!!!
Last edited:
Of course, People can coerce and blackmail and compel you. They can make jingoistic speeches and invoke nationalism, they can preach peace and take you to war, they can put God in the driving seat and insist that you are his martyr.
They can provide you with bombs, guns, grenades and missiles.
At the end of the day though, it is still you and ONLY you, who pulls the trigger, throws the nuclear bomb, drops the missile
Thats free will and thats your responsibility
They can provide you with bombs, guns, grenades and missiles.
At the end of the day though, it is still you and ONLY you, who pulls the trigger, throws the nuclear bomb, drops the missile
Thats free will and thats your responsibility
Last edited:
Fish sauce
Does anyone want to go about this logically?
Remember that the presuppositions of the proposition are Calvinist.
Thus, Frank's answer is, simply:
Does anyone want to go about this logically?
Remember that the presuppositions of the proposition are Calvinist.
Thus, Frank's answer is, simply:
It's God. It is not supposed to make sense. Being of Calvinist fashion, doubly so.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
What nonsense. The threat of punishment is part of determinism. It deters people from behaving harmful towards one another. No threat of punishment means no deterrence. Whether or not free will exists is really inconsequential.
Individuals still have choices. It's just that the circumstances, past and present, determine what chance a person has of making a particular choice. Chaos theory, if you will.
It begs the question of what free will actually is. I think it's a nonsensical concept. Don't you have be to 'all-knowing' (past and present) in order to have true free will?
Last edited:
Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
An improvment woud be... that society understood that free will is an illusion... an even tho people woud still be held responsible for ther actons... it woud also be understood that no one deserves punishment.!!!
Thats irrelevent to my statment... "no one deserves punishment".!!!
Do you thank people make any un-influended choises... or meerly have the illusion of makin un-influenced choises.???
I suggest its the ability to make an un-influenced choise... do you agree wit that.???
How woud bein all-knowin amount to free-will.???
An improvment woud be... that society understood that free will is an illusion... an even tho people woud still be held responsible for ther actons... it woud also be understood that no one deserves punishment.!!!
Thats irrelevent to my statment... "no one deserves punishment".!!!
Do you thank people make any un-influended choises... or meerly have the illusion of makin un-influenced choises.???
I suggest its the ability to make an un-influenced choise... do you agree wit that.???
How woud bein all-knowin amount to free-will.???
Last edited:
Last edited:
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
No, it isn't. How do you think the world would change if no one would be held accountable for their actions? They deserve punishment, determinism or not, in order to discourage them to do it again.
When you're influenced, it doesn't mean that you have no choice.
Their is no such thing. It's an oxymoron.
Hmm I guess what I meant to say was that you need to be all-knowing (in said respect) in order to know whether or not you have free will.
How do you define free will.???
Yeah, but you were compelled to think that makes sense.
I rather enjoyed this, though the first part seems to be saying something different from the second part.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Deserve is a meaningless word in a deterministic universe. They were coerced to pull the trigger and we were coerced to punish them. No harm, no foul. As well blame the rain for falling as blame either party.
How did 'you' get isolated form the chain of causation_'?
Whether the universe is dterministic or not... the word "deserve" ant meaninless in this discusson... Enmos thanks people deserve punishment.!!!
Originally Posted by Blindman
It is my view that the universe is deterministic, thus there is no such thing as free will.
Whats you'r pont.???
It is my view that the universe is deterministic, thus there is no such thing as free will.
Whats you'r pont.???
A couple of points. A determinist does not own their ideas, they simply happen. A determinist has no idea if their arguments and ideas really make sense, since they have to have them, according to themselves. They may seem to make sense, but that's about it. There is something ironic about saying that everything is determined and something utterly and devastatingly humbling, yet this irony and humility, oddly, do not seem traits of most determinists.