Free Will

Status
Not open for further replies.
It may be worth reducing the issue down to only one choice between two alternatives.
Say for example life has placed a man in a position to either jump off a bridge or walk away. He sees no other alternative his life being as it is.

He stands there agonising over the choice - does he or does he not?

It is the struggle between two extreme choices that indicates his freedom to choose even though it may only be limited to only two alternatives.

What he decides to choose and why he decides to choose is not contravening his freedom to make that choice IMO.

It is only when he has absolutely no choice that he can declare he has no freewill....
But as soon as he has a choice that he can make then he has freewill. As said the reasons for making the choice are irrelevant to the freedom to make it. IMO
try that angle and see how you go...
Free will is not the same beast as freedom is what I am saying I guess...
 
Quantum Quack said:
It may be worth reducing the issue down to only one choice between two alternatives.
Say for example life has placed a man in a position to either jump off a bridge or walk away. He sees no other alternative his life being as it is.

He stands there agonising over the choice - does he or does he not?

It is the struggle between two extreme choices that indicates his freedom to choose even though it may only be limited to only two alternatives.

What he decides to choose and why he decides to choose is not contravening his freedom to make that choice IMO.

It is only when he has absolutely no choice that he can declare he has no freewill....
But as soon as he has a choice that he can make then he has freewill. As said the reasons for making the choice are irrelevant to the freedom to make it. IMO
try that angle and see how you go...
Free will is not the same beast as freedom is what I am saying I guess...
Click to expand...


Then even if the man had a brane tumer causin his thouts of jumpin... an he did in fact jump... that he jumped was a freewill choise.???
 
Quantum Quack said:
... I wanted to demonstrate the distinction between oppression of free will and freewill itself.
...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this comparison assumes the very thing we're questioning:free-will.
By positing that something can actively rebuff, or oppose the execution of freewill, one is already granting that it does indeed exist.
 
How do we know that the decisions we make are purely our own choice and we weren't meant to make them??? And all the thoughts and choices presented to us were purely a part of persuading us into the decision we were suppose to be taking???
 
Originally Posted by Quantum Quack
I wanted to demonstrate the distinction between oppression of free will and freewill itself. ”


“ Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
I thank any distincton between the 2 is only emagined dew to incomplete knowledge of the degree of "oppression"... which i thank is 100%.!!! ”


glaucon said:
Can you try this again in English?
Click to expand...


I thank the reason that "will" can somtimes seem free is because we are unaware of all the influences that make free-will imposible.!!!
 
theobserver said:
How do we know that the decisions we make are purely our own choice and we weren't meant to make them??? And all the thoughts and choices presented to us were purely a part of persuading us into the decision we were suppose to be taking???
Click to expand...


Are you suggestin that we are puppets.???
 
If "will" is truly free from the chain of cause and effect, then please can someone explain how the "will" intervenes and break the chain that began with the start of the universe and will end with its demise (if there even was a beginning or if there will be an end).

And then can someone explain how this intervening "will" was uncaused.

Many thanks.
 
cluelusshusbund said:
Are you suggestin that we are puppets.???
Click to expand...

What if we are puppets in the hands of nature with a limited set of choices?

It has to be noted that this so called freedom of choice is limited to each brain. You cannot make the choices i make because my brain works differently than yours. So technically its a subjective freedom and its constrained in its root if you can observe. If nature has a certain amount of control over our physical structure, its just easy to deduce that our thoughts are controlled as well.
 
Sarkus said:
If "will" is truly free from the chain of cause and effect, then please can someone explain how the "will" intervenes and break the chain that began with the start of the universe and will end with its demise (if there even was a beginning or if there will be an end).

And then can someone explain how this intervening "will" was uncaused.

Many thanks.
Click to expand...

Lots of people thank they have or want to have a thang they call "free-will"... but not many of 'em seem to want to discuss the issues you raize.!!!
 
Quantum Quack said:
yeah it's a bit morbid I guess, but I wanted to demonstrate the distinction between oppression of free will and freewill itself.
Maybe I could have "chosen" a better view...hmmmmmm
Click to expand...

No, the view is fine. Quite lovely.

Free will is choosing the third choice when presented with only two options.

I suspect you don't hang out with many Buddhists. :)

The dilemma you propose is a traditional one in Buddhism.
 
Sarkus said:
If "will" is truly free from the chain of cause and effect, then please can someone explain how the "will" intervenes
Click to expand...

What external force caused you to type your question?

Why do you not just remain at rest?
 
swarm said:
What external force caused you to type your question?
Click to expand...

If someone or something "influences" one's decisions to act, then can it still be called "free will"?

You will note, I hope, that we're "influenced" from the time of our birth and each and everyone of those "influences" make our decisions possible.

A new-born baby has free will ...the rest of us have been influenced.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
\A new-born baby has free will ...the rest of us have been influenced.
Click to expand...

The new born didnt even have a choise in whether it woud esist or not... an any diseases it mite havae in the future was very likely determined the instent the egge it cam from was fertalized.!!!
 
swarm said:
No, the view is fine. Quite lovely.

Free will is choosing the third choice when presented with only two options.

I suspect you don't hang out with many Buddhists. :)

The dilemma you propose is a traditional one in Buddhism.
Click to expand...

I wonder though whether free will is determined by the amount of choice available to choose from.
As I suggested I do not think free will is the same as freedom.

To go for a third choice as you indicated would to me show a greater sense of freedom but not enhanced freewill. A relief from oppression perhaps?
It is true that we are all subject to influences all the time, but I wonder whether this is an issue of free will [ irreducable as a notion] or merely an issue of freedom to exercise that freewill. Thus even in severely oppressed circumstances a person still retains freewill.
This may seem to be a rather silly little point to go on about But I feel it is actually quite important to the discusion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top