New Discovery

And I thought it was merely a play in words as a jest.

Genetics, environment, experiences, etc. determine options. Our discussion in here is not about options but how do we act in a situation since we accept that options are available.

Based off of preference.

Value of the “greater good”, one can value options as a whole (try anything once mentality) and try something “new”, the option is available, their liking that option however is not their choice, thus choice becomes about preference of which stems from environment and genetics. Unless one likes to make the choice of which they do not prefer, redundantly, leading ultimately to misery and I feel is a path of resistance, Humanity instinctively chooses comfort if and when it is available because it is common sense to choose the state of which lessens agony instead of one which enhances it. The diversity of preference and self is ultimately the only way evolution can work for it leads to new correlations of old information.

By good I mean the subjective sense.

If both are identical bags, inspection then occurs of if it is true, if it turns out to be truth that indeed both bags are identical and there is no lesser then the option no longer matters as a whole between the two, they may even take both if that option is available. It is a choice based off of comfort which may manifest as greed as well when ego is active and unchecked, this is obvious due to how society is right now where people have taken comfort to an extreme and do not even bother educating oneself for truth is discomfort.

I am not talking about identical bags. I am talking about two different options which are just equally liked. Think of a situation that you want to buy ice cream and you like chocolate and vanilla ice cream equally. Can you choose one of the ice cream? Of course you can. What I am arguing is that a deterministic system cannot resolve such a situation and halts permanently. You also halt in such a situation temporarily but you eventually pick up one of the ice cream. So you are not a deterministic system and instead free.

Is that not dependent upon mood or belief of what could be the “right” choice of which one will return a greater satisfaction?

When I am picking between donuts or cookies (I love both) I take into account what mood I am in, not so much a struggle of not being able to choose due to liking them both equally. Or how about how I love Italian food but also love Mexican food, mood plays a role in determining which one we choose and which will be “more fulfilling” based on what makes one salivate more in the present moment.

You might be in a mood to have cookies but think that it makes you fat so you believe that it is better to go with donuts. You want both options equally at the end when you consider all circumstances. This is a situation that mood or belief alone cannot move you to pick up the option you want so you have to decide freely.

Just because you like two items the same does not halt determinism and make you free. Just the quandary over which item to choose is also part of the deterministic process which is beyond control.

Is that not dependent upon mood or belief of what could be the “right” choice of which one will return a greater satisfaction?

When I am picking between donuts or cookies (I love both) I take into account what mood I am in, not so much a struggle of not being able to choose due to liking them both equally. Or how about how I love Italian food but also love Mexican food, mood plays a role in determining which one we choose and which will be “more fulfilling” based on what makes one salivate more in the present moment.
[/quote]
You might be in a mood to have cookies but think that it makes you fat so you believe that it is better to go with donuts. You want both options equally at the end when you consider all circumstances. This is a situation that mood or belief alone cannot move you to pick up the option you want so you have to decide freely.
[/quote]
Peacegirl: Mood or belief are not necessarily the only driving force that determines preference. One of your reasons for not eating the cookies (although they’re your favorite) is because your little sister loves them too and there’s only one left, so it gives you greater satisfaction to save the cookie for her rather than eat it yourself. There is no free choice even when we are choosing between items that would both be satisfying.

It’s to an extent, it has limits if anything. Will is never free, why we must practice using it, to make the /right/ choices, otherwise we end up regretting sometimes. If it is at all limited then it is not free, it is on multiple levels, I don’t see how it isn’t.

It’s a pitiful thing to see so few people who have ever met a free man, or who are free themselves.

Those that have never tasted freedom in their lives, are so desperate for it, obviously… (the op)

No such thing as full fledged freedom, we are servants of the subconscious through micro to macro, it’s that simple to be honest. One works to live otherwise they die, that isn’t freedom. That’s a wall. Choice is limited.

Just because your choice is limited, and you are not free, doesn’t mean it’s the same for everybody else.

Some men are free. Don’t see many around here, though.

How are you “free”? Genetically bound and also bound to archetypes consisting of environment. It’s How it works with the human mind. You are human, nothing above and nothing less than me.

You trying to say you are unattached as in the philosophy of Buddhism?

I see people procrastinate decisions until they can no longer make one all the time. Until we get ‘like’ meters, I will assume that those who choose, preferred one option, and those who didn’t had the exact balance of fears and desires and couldn’t move. LOL.

Mistress or wife. Oh, I choose both says man X.
Or he keeps putting off deciding, then has a heart attack at 40-

Some people roll dice when torn.

Anyway, there are always third options.

I find it hard to believe that with complicated creatures like us it happens more than once in a hundred lifetimes that the actual levels of desire are absolutely equal.

In fact I think that idea is funny.

And still the situation often halts.

“Not choosing” is also a choice. It’s the third option in the given example.

My hope is that we could beyond the debate over free will. We don’t have free will but that does not mean prior events are responsible for our choices, as the standard definition of determinism often implies. That’s inaccurate which creates a false dichotomy and why compatibilism came about, which is also inaccurate. I tried to explain the reason man does not have free will, according to the author of Decline and Fall of All Evil. His definition is spot on. I understand that it’s unusual for someone to actually come online and make serious claims, but that’s exactly what I’m doing, which is why I titled this thread as I did.

Well, sure. I was pointing out the absurdity of his argument. This equibalanced human who simply stops, like a robot in an old film faced with a paradox. And not choosing does nto mean there likes were equal. It could mean anything.

But his post seemed to be arguing that we always choose and this shows that even with equal desires we can still choose. But there is no way to know this. Perhaps when we choose between to options it shows that we had a preference for one that was stronger. When we don’t it shows that we have a determined default not to choose but to go and do other things.

His scenario is impossible to show actually exists and does nto contradict determinism.

If you really believe you are not free, then you should also realize that there would be no way for you to know if your reasons for thinking you are are 1) rational 2) univerally applicable. You might simply be compelled to think your arguments made sense and applied also to other people by qualia.

Some people roll dice because that is an aspect to their personality, not because they have the freedom of choice to do so… we’re bound by who we are and I wouldn’t have it any other way. What we learn shapes our picking. We only have freedom to pick from the choices available based on preference/personality, we don’t get any and every choice, which does that not inhibit what “freedom” means? If someone rolls a dice they let the dice pick for them, that’s not free will, it is just another method of making a choice based off of belief and randomness. There is a difference between having no freedom at all and being able to shape yourself freely and fully, we’re caught in the middle just like we are with chaos and order, existence is the balancing of duality. For the most part we pick what is to our greater satisfaction, if one does not make a choice is that too not apart of their personality? That’s a form of pessimism, not choosing in fear of making the “wrong” choice. If these weren’t traits of personality, decision making and being then why have, opportunists, realists, pessimists and optimists?

As far as I can tell you are disagreeing with the person I was disagreeing with. Not exactly the same way I was, but what you are saying does not contradict what I wrote.