It won't have an absolute effect. Removing half my brain limits the amount of decisions I can make. It doesn't force me to take one single action that I absolutely cannot deviate from. If an omniscient god creates reality, then prior to the creation of reality, that god knows everything action that is going to occur in that reality and cannot be wrong. Therefore, by creating that reality, the omniscient god is deciding to force those events to occur and the created reality has no choice to follow its pre-programmed path. Even if the actors in the reality are unaware, that does not mean that they have free will. It just means that they are unaware of their programming and have an illusion of free will. - - - Updated - - - Correct. God decided everything you would do by choosing to create reality.
I don't agree.i have known many scientists and engineers that were unaware. Robert McNamara springs to mind
I never said about any single action, but it WILL change your decisions, will it not? If it has ANY impact on your decisions with ANYthing, be it your decision to smile, or you decision to walk across the street without looking, then your argument of free will goes out the window. I mean, you're arguing that a brain is irrelevant to your decision process. That's what it comes down to. I understand why free will does not work with an omniscient god, but you have failed to explain why you can have free will if an omniscient god does not exist. Are you saying you have created reality if there is no omniscient god? Did you create the universe? Did you create the people and environment that influences your personality? Did you create your brain?
Got to agree with elijah for once! Created or not, unless that god puts pressure on you to choose one thing or another (which he could do, but we'd need to see evidence before accepting that is happening) then imo your choices are still made freely. Of course, what that creator would DO based on choices that he knew you were bound to make is a different question...
I would say nothing created reality, but i think the problem is that we are operating under two different definitions of free will. I defined my terms in my first post. Go back and look at them. No where did I claim that free will requires your actions to have no external influence at all.
Free Will denies the potential for God as an omniscient being...and thus "not God" (Since something "higher than God" can be conceptulized...i.e. a being WITH omniscience)... UNLESS....the "multi-verse" is true. In that case, "God" could see all possible outcomes and still not deny Free Will. BUT...if the "multi-verse" is true, then there would have to be Universes in which Pontus Pilate used his Free Will to order the release or simple imprisonment of Jesus...and thus no possibility for Crucifixion and therefore no Resurrection...and therefore no Redemption of Mankind. Give Pilate "free will"....and all bets are off for Christianity.
It really wouldn't make sense for a God IMO to be driving the decisions of its creations because if that was the case in a sense we really wouldn't be "us" we would be God. If there was a God I would be inclined to assume his influence on us would be much like that of the big bangs influence on us. We did not construct ourselves into a being of our own design and therefore cannot be free to choose who we in many respects already are the moment we are born. Every experience we have from that moment on influences us but how it influences us is determined by prior causes. We cant drive the car so to speak because we are the car and just because we seem to like the fact that we are turning left doesnt mean we could have chosen to turn right. Now people must understand that we do make choices. But someone would need to explain to me why they think it is that choice equals free will. Why dont people change who they are on a daily basis? Especially when for most people those changes would benefit them greatly? There is a reason why someone who has been overweight their whole lives who finally finds a way to get in shape calls it a lifestyle change. Its usually a great struggle to recondition your mind even in regards to physical activities and when people do this they find they are not as free as they once thought. Indeed if its something YOU really want who are YOU fighting against? Free will seems to suggest one could simply wake up one day and have the mind of a healthy individual and exercise and diet in a way that would make them physically healthy. We know this is not the case.
I read it and it changes nothing. You didn't answer my questions. Either you are in control of your decisions or you aren't. You can't be sorta in control or sorta influenced. It either changes your decision or or doesn't. If your brain determines you choices and you don't determine your brain, then there is no such thing as free will.
Yeah right. You have no habits? You have no distinct personality? Are people constantly telling you that you're acting different all the time? You have a mental disorder if that is the case. How can we have culture if people are just making random decisions and having random behaviors?
I only define free will as pertaining to something forcing you to make a decision that you have absolutely no control over. Even if you are limited to a handfull of choices by external influences, then you still have free will. You most definitely can be sorta influenced. Myself and my brain are one and the same.
For people who still believe they have free will I try to go from a position they can actually test for themselves and readily understand. So far the idea of processing information in the form of millions of thoughts per second in the conscious mind is one people tend to understand the most. From there hopefully they can handle hearing the rest.
Your brain was created due to external forces; external forces are constantly acting upon your brain; I can perform surgery on your brain and cause you to make different choices than the ones you would have made without that unwilled external force. All of these things dictate your choices, therefore, you have no free will. Your ability to reason and your desires that lead to specific choices are all influenced by your biology and forces acting upon it, which are out of your control, therefore, any choices you make are dependent on external, unwilled forces. You seem to think that even if I take away half your brain and it changes your behavior, you're still capable of free will if you can still act in some way that you find desirable and chosen. This is not free will. What you find desirable and what causes you to come to a conclusion is based on external and unchosen forces. The very fact that your decisions change in any way based on an unwilled force shows there is no free will. You didn't answer the questions and you're avoiding his point, which is that if we were truly in control, no one would struggle with behavior they dislike; they would just instantly change or not ever do it in the first place. Undesirable habits in one's life is evidence that we are not in fact in control of our behavior. Anyone in control of their behavior would not be dissatisfied with their habits.
if someone cannot do what they want to do does not mean they don't have free will. it simply means they have chosen not to change.they may tell themselves they want to change, but in fact they don't.
Even if those external forces limit me to two choices: do something or do nothing and I have the ability to choose one of them, then I still have free will. If external forces limit me to only a single choice, then I don't. BTW, are you a nihilist?
False. A part of them wants to change and a part does not. There would be no conflict if one truly determined their own choices. No, you don't still have free will. You are misunderstanding what free will is. Free will is the ability to act with disregard to any unwilled factor. It's not, "well, gee, this external factor completely changed the decision I was going to make, and since I can think of multiple options, the one I choose is freely willed." I'm not sure how to explain it any better. An external factor changed what you would have done, and is the cause of you making another "choice," so how can you possibly have willed it yourself if it was completely dependent upon an unwilled change? Let's try this: you are currently not a compulsive liar. You get into a car accident and you become a liar. You do not have free will because there is lying or not lying and you "choose" to lie. Your "choice" to do one of two things is not free because it was dictated by an unwilled factor. If you have a stroke and it changes your behavior, it's the same thing. You did not will the stroke, nor the change in behavior. Doing one of two things does not make it a willed behavior if the reason you do that specific thing is determined by that unwilled factor, in this case, a stroke or car accident. No, I'm not a nihilist.
what a load of nonsense. he has the free will to change or not to change. the reasons for why he does or does not have nothing to do with the fact he is free to do so
This is a nice thing to tell oneself when looking at the down trodden of the world much like telling yourself that you are the reason for your successes. Does family mean anything? Does it make a difference who your friends are? What about the place you grow up in? Your parents? But if we have free will why would any of it matter? And saying because you choose it to doesn't change the question. Why can't we all just be great people because we choose to be? Who needs positive influences in their lives? Why do people who go through the same bad experiences in life tend to make the exact same bad decisions? Find a way to answer this without the use of determining factors.
Like I said, we are operating on two completely different definitions of free will. I reject yours. BTW, you do understand that people can be self-aware of how they are being influenced by external stimuli and reject that influence, yes?
