There is no such thing as 'Free Will'

[juantoo3]

The part of self control that is delusional is not thinking that it is the product of causality.

Causality? I think this is one of those times when terms brought from one discipline in an attempt to meld with another discipline really loses its character and meaning in the translation.

There is such a difference between "material, domino theory" and meta-physical determinism that trying to combine the two really doesn't do much in the way of justice to either one. Of course, that is my opinion. The problem I see with convoluting scientific and philosophical terms is that they become overgeneralized and thereby lose their meaning, which causes a vagueness that leads to further misunderstanding rather than clarification.

Although Stephen J. Gould did not address this in particular that I know of, it is he that pointed out the "Non-overlapping Magisteria" between science and religion. There are a few others who have attempted a reconciliation between science and religion, but it is a really tough row to hoe, primarily I think because the two are speaking different languages (even when using the same tongue).

We've discussed this in the past around here, about how science is designed to answer questions of a "how?" nature, whereas religion is designed to answer questions of a "why?" nature. And since each philosophy now has its own authority structure, and for the last couple hundred years have been playing something of a power game with each other, it can be very confusing to a lay person when the jargon from one is inserted into the other. Perhaps the intent is pure in doing so, but it really only serves to create an air of confusion.

From a purely physical perspective, I suppose one could say that since everything came from something that from a scientific-philosophy POV everything is "pre"-determined. But from a religious-philosophy POV, there are implications that seriously undermine the entire ethical and moral structure of societies and cultures if one tries to carry this line of reasoning into the magisteria of religion.

It doesn't work, on a practical level. It doesn't make sense, on a philosophical level. And it can be (not saying at this point that it is) disingenuous and a subversive ploy to exert political power by a competing magisteria.

Which means that some sub-culture somewhere will probably pick it up and try to make something of it...human nature being what it is.

 

[juantoo3]

Any post can be linked to. It is the permalink function in the top right corner of any post's window.

The post at the top of the window that opened after clicking the link was the post I was asked Roger to answer.

Just a friendly FYI.

BTW... I can't help but notice that he still hasn't answered them.

Perhaps.

I'm just letting you know what happened when I clicked the links you provided.

No harm, no foul.

 

[citizenzen]

Shall we put a quarantine sign on this thread?

SG, take your pick...

Quarantined

Toxic Waste

Radioactive

Condemned

Under Fumigation

and still... UNANSWERED

 

[seattlegal]

SG, take your pick...

Quarantined

Toxic Waste

Radioactive

Condemned

Under Fumigation

and still... UNANSWERED

Let's see, which one would have the strongest influence?
Aha! This one:

 

[Tao_Equus]

There is a book out there called "The Shack" by William Paul Young...it's as close to one of the lost books the bible should have had, that there is...and "free will" is first and foremost in its design...

v/r

Q

If it was "lost" how did the author know what was in it?

 

[seattlegal]

The part of self control that is delusional is not thinking that it is the product of causality.

Stare at the center of this image, and after a while, describe what you see:

Here's a larger version:

 

[rodgertutt]

So please Roger, give me a reason to see your view as one that will lead me to live a better life, to become a better person.

My view (i.e. theistic fatalism) is that eventually God will transform all evil and suffering into something better that it happened for everyone because He cannot be hampered by the supposed "free will" of his creatures.

Being able to believe that is the strong influence that has enabled me to cope with the many negatives in my long life.

Believing that God is like that inspires me to try to treat others the way I would like to be treated, i.e. with empathy and compassion since I am sure they are the victims of the strongest influences they have and are experiencing in their lives.

My favorite quote is by Dr. Leslie Weatherhead:

“God’s purposes are so vast and glorious, beyond all guessing now, that when they are achieved and consummated, all our sufferings and sorrows of today, even the agonies that nearly break our faith, the disasters that well nigh overwhelm us, shall, seen from that fair country where God’s age long dreams come true, bulk as little as bulk now the pieces of a broken toy upon a nursery floor, over which, thinking that all our little world was in ruins, we cried ourselves to sleep.”

 

[citizenzen]

My view (i.e. theistic fatalism) is that eventually God will transform all evil and suffering into something better that it happened for everyone because He cannot be hampered by the supposed "free will" of his creatures.

Roger, thank you for answering my question in mostly your own words.

But I must follow up.

God... omniscient and all-powerful, is "hampered" by free will?

Maybe your God isn't so powerful after all.

 

[rodgertutt]

Stare at the center of this image, and after a while, describe what you see:

I see the purple dots intermittenly turning green then back to purple in a clockwise motion.
Is that what we are supposed to see?

 

[rodgertutt]

Roger, thank you for answering my question in mostly your own words.

But I must follow up.

God... omniscient and all-powerful, is "hampered" by free will?

Maybe your God isn't so powerful after all.

But that was exactly my point. Since there is no such a thing as free will, God can't be hampered by it.

 

[rodgertutt]

Gotta go. Company coming.

 

[citizenzen]

But that was exactly my point. Since there is no such a thing as free will, God can't be hampered by it.

Wow. Who knew? God isn't all-powerful after all.

Free will... it's like God's kryptonite.

 

[seattlegal]

The part of self control that is delusional is not thinking that it is the product of causality.

Stare at the center of this image, and after a while, describe what you see:

Here's a larger version:

I see the purple dots intermittenly turning green then back to purple in a clockwise motion.
Is that what we are supposed to see?

There are no green dots. It's only pink dots turning off and on. The green dots you see are the negative image of the pink dot (switched off) lingering on the retina. It's an optical illusion. If you stare at it long enough, the pink dots will disappear. (In much the same manner as habitual circular reasoning will disappear from your consciousness if you keep utilizing it. You will become trapped by illusion.)

 

[Dream]

Wow that is cool!

 

[greymare]

LOL and I like how I can see a circle of green dots off to the right. LOL

 

[juantoo3]

Since there is no such a thing as free will, God can't be hampered by it.

With all due respect, G-d isn't hampered by free-will to begin with. So this is a red herring argument.

Free-will is an essential element to love. Without free-will, love is meaningless. Love that is not given freely, or withheld freely, isn't love at all. So it is not G-d that is hampered by free-will, it is love that is hampered by the lack of free-will. Love as we know it cannot exist where there is no free will.

 

[Marsh]

I've been happily married for 47 years because my preference has always been to please my wife.

As anyone can portray anyone on the internet, I am not entirely inclined to believe you at this point, Roger. You certainly have knowledge, and are not a fool by any means, but you speak with the stubborn absoluteness that is more fitting of somebody my age (30) than somebody your age. In my experience, wisdom grows with age, and a wise man is wise enough to know that he could be wrong. It is the young man who is always convinced that he is right, and that he is right in a zero-sum way. It is also usually the young who jump on board a new way of thinking with such absolute zeal, while the wise man tends to be a more prudent chooser of ideas, not too fast to commit completely, having seen so many "good" ideas proven to be false throughout his 70 years. Finally, and most importantly, I don't think it's possible for any man to go for 47 years of marriage and always find out that his preference was pleasing his wife-- a falliable human being, prone to making mistakes and making poor choices. I am a reasonable man (I think), and I love my wife above all other people in the world, but I have made many choices that were not my preference in order to please her, and I know FOR CERTAIN that these choices were not my preference by the sour feeling they left in the pit of my stomach (see; the absoluteness of youth in action).

I think you have presented an interesting idea. However, I also think that CZ is quite correct in his assertion that this idea adds nothing to the realm of knowledge. True knowledge-- truth, as you yourself have said-- is something that is beautiful to the ears, because God has put it into our souls to recognize truth for what it is, and to appreciate its beauty. The words you have repeated so many times are, at least to me, the bleating of a sheep or the clanging of a gong; they seem hollow, frustrating, and.... unbeautiful.

 

[citizenzen]

Finally, and most importantly, I don't think it's possible for any man to go for 47 years of marriage and always find out that his preference was pleasing his wife...

That actually is my goal too. But I've only been married for 15 years, so I have a long way to go.

As for our dear Mr. Tutt, he seems to have grown weary of our negative view towards his theories. I certainly hope we haven't chased him completely out of IO.

Hopefully he'll return and have something to add to the discussion... besides baseball scores.

 

[Tao_Equus]

LOL and I like how I can see a circle of green dots off to the right. LOL

No, thats just the DT's kicking in

 

[Quahom1]

With all due respect, G-d isn't hampered by free-will to begin with. So this is a red herring argument.

Free-will is an essential element to love. Without free-will, love is meaningless. Love that is not given freely, or withheld freely, isn't love at all. So it is not G-d that is hampered by free-will, it is love that is hampered by the lack of free-will. Love as we know it cannot exist where there is no free will.

Indeed, without free will there is no love. We wouldn't know the difference between love and no love. But free will allows for "independence" which is not of God, which allows us to experience "lack of love", so that we can know the difference.

Why do I say that independence is not of God? Because when we decide to be "independent", we seperate ourselves from God (who is Love), thus that which is not of God, is not love, nor good.

And humans have chosen to be "independent" of God since Adam made his choice...funny that...we chose to seperate ourselves from God...for what? Because we could do it better? Jury came in a long time ago on that one, yet we refuse to accept the verdict, to this day...