Free Will vs. Destiny

[Spoken Word]

If it's been debated, I'm sorry. Simply pm me the link and I'll read the thread. If not.......

Which one do you agree with? This is if you agree with either, obviosly.

I believe in in Free Will.
My proof?
You are in control of every action(decision) you make. If you don't think this is a fact, explain.

[BionicArmofDeth]

This is not true. Look at it like this: We are not powerful creatures that can change the laws of physics. The laws of physics are our understanding of reality. The way we see it we live on a big huge ball of minerals. Can you somehow not obey gravity? No. We are chained to these laws no matter what, even if we find a way around them.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Spoken Word If it's been debated, I'm sorry. Simply pm me the link and I'll read the thread. If not....... Which one do you agree with? This is if you agree with either, obviosly. I believe in in Free Will. My proof? You are in control of every action(decision) you make. If you don't think this is a fact, explain.

Every action is the exact reaction to the previous stimulus. How one instant changes from its current state to the next follows the laws that govern it. This includes mental causality. Every mental decision can be traced by exact chemical signatures and if there are any other forces attributing to the decision making process, then they too must follow a reason or "cause and a effect" pattern. For every happening, we can ask "why?" If "why?" is not satisfied, you have just found a gap in a force we never knew had holes; logic.

Now, you may think.. "well that doesn't mean we don't have free will. You're just being picky." Let's introduce one of your beliefs into the picture: God. God is omniscient, and thus, we can conclude that even if God isn't dictating our decisions or actions, something is. Else, there would be nothing to to "know" about the future because it would be unpredictable.

Thus, I cannot break away from this. I am the product of my environment, and I do NOT feel free.

[jeffl]

It's a feedback issue; you choose what you look at, you choose what you practice. That is a free choice; you choose.

[tman_ndsu08]

Just because every event has a cause doesn't mean that not every event is possible in the future.

Thus, free will.

[Spoken Word]

I haven't read something that clearly shows my comment:
You are in control of every action(decision) you make.
Is false. Or incorrect.

Now, if I am mistaken and the idea of Free Will states something different, then I'm wrong.

[Yasa]

If there was an omniscient god that knew the future, or a destiny, that would lead to meaningless because the future would be set and as good as the past. The thing is, if we feel we have free will, how do we prove that we don't? As in, if destiny existed, how would we ever know?

Also, I'd say free will is the freedom to make descisions regarding actions that are within our current power. You must have the power to do something in order to choose to do it.

[Slevin57]

We are in a closed system. Free will is not about changing the laws of physics or even making a waffle look like a baseball bat.

Like people said above, it's about choice, not about changing reality.

[Jack]

Destiny implies a plan. A plan implies a planner. A planner of destinies would need to be omniscient. Such omniscience does not exist that we know of. Based on my understanding of reality, destiny cannot exist.

But that doesn't mean that free will is the only other possibility. As has been said, the number of events that indirectly impact on your ability to make choices renders that act not exactly free as we might think of it. We are victims of outside influences, often subconsciously.

[ZNFYRH]

Damn Isherwood staying up late and the forum back-up this morning.

I agree that destiny means that there was a planner.

But I do also agree that we don't really have free will, since the consequences of others actions can affect our own lives.

[Osborn F Enready]

Free-Will without question for me.....or I should say, after all the questions to be honest.

[Fangrim]

This is to Yasa and Lullaby Chainer:

The existence of an omniscient being, like God, does not remove our free will. For the purpose of this debate to make this clearer, I propose we call this omniscient being "Bob," who is simply any normal person, except he is omniscient: he knows everything, specficially, he knows the future, and the decisions that we will make.

Simply because someone knows what decision you will make does not render you without will. This is a common misconception, and is incorrectly used by determinists as evidence that we have no free will.
For example, let's say that sub-Bob is observing an event: a man comes upon a deadly insect that is steadily moving toward his wife. Sub-Bob is only aware that the man is not afraid or incapacitated by the presense of the insect, does not freeze under pressure, loves his wife very dearly, and would do anything to save her. Sub-Bob "knows," or at least has a pretty good hunch, that the man will prevent the insect from killing his wife. Note that this does not remove the free will of the man to do as he wills: simply because Sub-Bob has a hunch that he will take a course of action does not mean that is so. In fact, in this case, what sub-Bob does not know is that the man is a secret agent that knows the insect will be unable to kill his wife because this is simply a trap to capture a Soviet spy who has fallen madly in love with the man's wife in a fake love-affair, which the wife has knowingly participated in so as to help the nationalist cause.
Yes, this is a fantastically ludicrous situation. But the man has free will here, regardless of whether sub-Bob has a "hunch" of what he will do.

Now, let us transform sub-Bob to fully-fledged Bob, the omniscient being. Bob is now fully aware of the situation and knows by looking in the future that the man will not kill the spider, but this has not removed his free will in any way. The situation has not changed one iota since the arrival of omniscient Bob. Simply because he knows the man will do something does not mean he has no free will.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Fangrim This is to Yasa and Lullaby Chainer: The existence of an omniscient being, like God, does not remove our free will. For the purpose of this debate to make this clearer, I propose we call this omniscient being "Bob," who is simply any normal person, except he is omniscient: he knows everything, specficially, he knows the future, and the decisions that we will make. Simply because someone knows what decision you will make does not render you without will. This is a common misconception, and is incorrectly used by determinists as evidence that we have no free will. For example, let's say that sub-Bob is observing an event: a man comes upon a deadly insect that is steadily moving toward his wife. Sub-Bob is only aware that the man is not afraid or incapacitated by the presense of the insect, does not freeze under pressure, loves his wife very dearly, and would do anything to save her. Sub-Bob "knows," or at least has a pretty good hunch, that the man will prevent the insect from killing his wife. Note that this does not remove the free will of the man to do as he wills: simply because Sub-Bob has a hunch that he will take a course of action does not mean that is so. In fact, in this case, what sub-Bob does not know is that the man is a secret agent that knows the insect will be unable to kill his wife because this is simply a trap to capture a Soviet spy who has fallen madly in love with the man's wife in a fake love-affair, which the wife has knowingly participated in so as to help the nationalist cause. Yes, this is a fantastically ludicrous situation. But the man has free will here, regardless of whether sub-Bob has a "hunch" of what he will do. Now, let us transform sub-Bob to fully-fledged Bob, the omniscient being. Bob is now fully aware of the situation and knows by looking in the future that the man will not kill the spider, but this has not removed his free will in any way. The situation has not changed one iota since the arrival of omniscient Bob. Simply because he knows the man will do something does not mean he has no free will.

No, the problem is the difference between predicting or guessing or even foolish whole-hearted knowing and ACTUALLY knowing what will happen. It's not the knowing that is causing the destruction of free will, it is what is implied when you introduce the idea that a future is known with exact precision and for 100% perfect accuracy that a specific event will happen. Ask yourself, if this event is GOING to happen.. why is it going to happen? Then go back to my post and pay close attention to the real reason why free will is destroyed by omniscience, and not the omniscience itself. The omniscience only implies the key factor that inhibits free will.

[Yasa]

Quote by: Fangrim Now, let us transform sub-Bob to fully-fledged Bob, the omniscient being. Bob is now fully aware of the situation and knows by looking in the future that the man will not kill the spider, but this has not removed his free will in any way. The situation has not changed one iota since the arrival of omniscient Bob. Simply because he knows the man will do something does not mean he has no free will.

I quite disagree. If the future is set, there is ultimately no free will. Just because the illusion of free will remains, doesn't mean that it does. The thing is, if it didn't exist but we felt it did, how would we ever know?

If the future is set, that means it's unchangeable--similar to the past. If we do not have the choice of what happens in the future (even if we feel we do), free will doesn't exist.

[Manzooka]

I believe in free will within the confines of the chemicals, horomones and other physical elements that govern how we will react to stimuli. That and the laws of physics of course.

I'm a rehabilitation counselor by trade and primarily work with a bi-polar and schizophrenic population. The way many of those individuals interpret the world has MUCH to do with their condition.

So all in all I'd say that Will exists but it isn't totally free. Let's call it "Sanctioned Will". It's free in so much as it's allowed to be free.

[Osborn F Enready]

Manzooka said: So all in all I'd say that Will exists but it isn't totally free. Let's call it "Sanctioned Will". It's free in so much as it's allowed to be free.

Am I to assume the "limiter" of that will that you speak of, is nature? (physics, science, etc)

If so, I agree.

[Fangrim]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer No, the problem is the difference between predicting or guessing or even foolish whole-hearted knowing and ACTUALLY knowing what will happen. It's not the knowing that is causing the destruction of free will, it is what is implied when you introduce the idea that a future is known with exact precision and for 100% perfect accuracy that a specific event will happen. Ask yourself, if this event is GOING to happen.. why is it going to happen? Then go back to my post and pay close attention to the real reason why free will is destroyed by omniscience, and not the omniscience itself. The omniscience only implies the key factor that inhibits free will.

So basically,
causality --> no free will
noncausality/unpredictability --> free will

I'd like confirmation before I continue.

[Fangrim]

Quote by: Yasa I quite disagree. If the future is set, there is ultimately no free will. Just because the illusion of free will remains, doesn't mean that it does. The thing is, if it didn't exist but we felt it did, how would we ever know? If the future is set, that means it's unchangeable--similar to the past. If we do not have the choice of what happens in the future (even if we feel we do), free will doesn't exist.

You make the simple claim that if the future is set, there is ultimately no free will. Provide support analysis please
To the contrary, we have free will regardless of whether someone knows what we will do. If you will notice, you use "omniscience" and "the future is set" fairly interchangably. I disagree. Simply because I know something is going to happen does not mean I "set" it that way. Basically, you make the erroneous assumption that if the future is known, then we don't have free will. The answer to this is that we have set our future, not "Bob". When "the future is set," it is set by us.

[Manzooka]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Am I to assume the "limiter" of that will that you speak of, is nature? (physics, science, etc) If so, I agree.

Yes indeed. That's exactly what I was referring to.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Fangrim causality --> no free will

Causality is fact. Every event has a cause.


But that doesn't mean that the set of possible causes is finite.


Just as long as anything is possible in the future, free will survives.

It is and so it does.