Free Will... Again

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
402

SilenusKallikantzaros

1h

Of course you do….

Maybe you are lying to yourself, or to us……but you do have an objective.

PEACEGIRL: I’m not lying to myself or to anyone.

Silenus: What objective does morality have, in all species?

Survival of the group, at the expense of individual freedoms.

PEACEGIRL: You are not following me Silenus (are you Satyr; you sound like the same guy?). People are motivated by many factors, one being survival of the group especially if the group is threatened. This is not the free will I’m referring to. Do you understand what freedom of the will means in terms of the free will/determinism debate?

SILENUS: You believe in universal morality and cannot explain how and why it evolved?

PEACEGIRL: There is no universal morality because there is no universal moral code, especially where survival is involved. Self-preservation demands that we do whatever we can to survive, and if a moral code (like the ten commandments) tells us not to kill, but killing is our only way not to be killed ourselves, then abiding by that would be to our detriment.

SILENUS: And if it hadn’t you would not claim that it was inevitable, would you?

PEACEGIRL: You are asking a hypothetical question as if to say it could have turned out otherwise. The fact is it did happen because people needed these ethical standards for the culture to thrive…

SILENUS: So, after the fact, you continue to claim that the world could not have been any other way…making morality a divine mission, right, hypocrite?

PEACEGIRL: You can call it whatever you want. I don’t consider the fact that we do not have free will a divine mission sent to us by an Abrahamic god.

SILENUS: Whatever crap you tell yourself, you are an Abrahamic…since you’ve adopted its core ethical claim, that the world is governed by god’s will…and it could not have been any other way…..and we must acknowledge this…..as sinners, right?

PEACEGIRL: I have said no such thing about being governed by god’s will, other than using the term god to refer to the laws that govern us. That is very different than an Abrahamic god. You’re very confused. Where did I say people were sinners who have to acknowledge this? I have no idea where you’re coming from.

SILENUS: So, for your ilk, all that remains is to acknowledge and udnerstand god’s divine will, or what he has determined for us?

PEACEGIRL: You keep using terms that don’t apply. What ilk am I a part of? You have drawn a conclusion that is inaccurate. No one, not even God himself, can go against what you yourself have determined to be the right choice in life.

SILENUS: Right hypocrite?

PEACEGIRL: Wrong.

403

Reread EVERYTHING I posted….you remain clueless.

But…if you had the mind you wouldn’t be clueless.

Once more, your simplicity has drawn me into a pointless exchange….

I’ll do the unfathomable and CHOOSE not to continue wasting my time…..because I m free to do so.

Of course you don’t, sweetie, because if you had a clue you would realize that you’ve simply changed the terminology….and call god’s will ‘determinism.’.

404

SilenusKallikantzaros

25m

Reread EVERYTHING I posted….you remain clueless.

But…if you had the mind you wouldn’t be clueless.

PEACEGIRL: When you talk the way you do, it weakens your argument. It shows me you can’t stand on your own without all the put-downs.

SILENUS: Once more, your simplicity has drawn me into a pointless exchange….

PEACEGIRL: The last time I looked, the door was open.

SILENUS: I’ll do the unfathomable and CHOOSE not to continue wasting my time…..because I m free to do so.

PEACEGIRL: Yes, you are free to make a decision based on the antecedents you are considering (i.e., there is no gun to your head), but once a choice is made, IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN OTHERWISE. That is the definition of DETERMINISM.

SILENUS: Of course you don’t, sweetie, because if you had a clue you would realize that you’ve simply changed the terminology….and call god’s will ‘determinism.’.

PEACEGIRL: There is a difference between a personal god (an Abrahamic god or a Jesus god) and laws that govern the universe. That is how this author used the term, because we are controlled by the laws of our nature. We cannot step outside of these laws. We are part of them. Call it god, call it whatever you want. If it’s true, then that is what matters, not how you label it.

​

​

405

Because your religion, the religion you don’t believe in, says that God rather creates this world rather than simply put everyone into Heaven automatically, but instead creates a shitworld as a “test” for us.

I do blame people, both the drunk drivers and the people who glorify alcoholism, and videogames which reward ‘achievements’ for drunk driving and such to normalize drunk driving, and most of all Car-Centric-Capitalists who went against democracy to bring cars to cities in the 1900s, even though some cities voted against it.

And really what is the real cause of suffering, well its your own brain, which causes you to be in pain and causes your consciousness to be trapped within the confines of it. If there is no such thing as brains theres no such thing as pain, boredom or suffering… unless somehow disembodied consciousness, disembodied souls are possible… yet unproven.

1 Like
406

We have to blame and punish in this world, but just imagine if there was a better way? After all, threats of blame and punishment have only been partial deterrents. Some of the most heinous crimes are done by people who are willing to risk going to jail or even the death penalty to get what they want, and even if we become collateral damage.

407

So it’s pointless to argue against you, when you are a mouthpiece for your “Author”. And, conveniently, we must pay a dollar-price to hear more of your inanity, correct? Quite the ploy.

So one must “step outside the laws (of the Universe / God / Christ) in order to have Free-Will.

This begs-the-question, laws…according to whom exactly??? You? The Author you’re shilling books for? Right?

Your argument is defeated on an Appeal to Authority.

408

@promethean75 Care to step in here…? Or shall I continue without your take on this?

409

If you are not a functional aspect of the earth, then you can have free will; otherwise, you’re living in a dualistic delusion.

410

I guess life is an illusion because it is not immortal, and cannot exit causality.

1 Like
411

You exist Silenus because you need to exist to claim that you don’t exist so if you claim that you don’t exist then you are a liar that exists.

So you have a choice now in your existence.

Whether to believe that you are a misrepresentation of reality (an illusion) or whether to believe that you are a representation of reality (a non illusion).

You believe the former ….that’s ok…..you have the free will to believe what you want in your existence.

I believe the latter myself.

This question will be put to the masses.

Philosophy and Science has now reached a crossroads and there is no going back.

412

Since @promethean75 is shying away on this point (weird huh?), I’ll go ahead then.

The action of ‘Blame’ is equal to that of finding ‘Cause’ in Nature. It doesn’t matter where an individual points his finger, at storm clouds, at flood waters, at a raging fire, at other people, at himself, etc. – all of it is the same in the sense of finding some original cause to a chain of events. This is a subjective project. It can begin anywhere. It can begin anytime. There is no “Objective” criterion of Causality. Surely the individual can try to be as ‘objective’ as possible, but really, in the end (or the beginning), he points to when and where he feels a “Responsibility”.

In Ancient times, this usually meant The Gods, as a power greater than oneself, or expanded as far as possible, a power greater than one’s own tribe / society / state / time / ancestry / etc.

1 Like
413

Seems like a false dichotomy.

Dualism is real, monism is false. And the proof that dualism is real, does not prove free will is real or isn’t real.

Dualism is real because consciousness emerges from the brain. You can’t find a consciousness directly in the brain. Scientists have already proven this.

414

All about how we CHOOSE to define the words we use….words representing concepts in our brains. concepts that refer or may not refer to experienced existence.

Using the same linguistic methodology we can ‘define’ any cocnept in a way that would make it impossible to exist….that would contradict existence itself.

Instead of starting with the experienced act, the independently falsifiable/verifiable act, they CHOOSE to start with a metaphysical, Platonic Ideal…..and they do so because they consciously or unconsciously desire a particular conclusion.

They begin with the word ‘will’ and then proceed with the term’ ‘free’, which is a qualifier.

Word-games.

415

You can choose to believe whatever unstructured nonsense you want Silenus.You can believe in chaos….l agree….you have free will to do so.

OR

You can choose to believe a structured philosophy;science and psychology that makes sense.

416

Without renunciation, one will keep on living in the quiet desperation. There’s limits to thought (knowledge), hence our dissatisfaction.

417

@Juhani

Very true. Welcome to the forum.

:clown_face:

418

Because identifying ‘Causes’ in Nature is a subjective enterprise, it also represents an individual’s inner-nature and constitution. It is like a Rorschach Test, a window into the deeper soul or spirit (Genetic combination). The manner in which it is conducted, its extensiveness and (scientific) rigor, “Determines” its outcomes. A superficial mind produces superficial outcomes and consequences. It represents Knowledge (Gnosis) or Ignorance (Ig-gnosis).

Most humans, most of the time, prefer Ignorance over Knowing, because it is easier, less stressful, less anxiety. Becoming an “Authority”, meanings owning Causes whether you are the source of them or not. That is Responsibility.

Something which Criminals avoid.

420

Many individuals are very happy with cognitively biased mainstream sciences claim that they exist and are misrepresentation of reality (an illusion).Of course they are.

It frees them up to do exactly what they want.

They are not interested in reality.

They prefer lies.

This is precisely why science is now divided between those individuals who pursue the lies of misrepresentation of reality (illusionary) science and individuals who pursue the truths of representation of reality (non illusionary) science.

1 Like
421

And this preference to favor mere opinions and hearsay, is of course by design too, and not out of free will. It’s all by design hence why most of us do not have doubt, to a point where it would lead to action. Fortunate are the ones who have began to revolt! By this I mean, not pointing fingers to society or whatever externals, but to be sensitive to one’s inner life.

Something I found related to this, talking about the environment we’re brought up in. It’s from Mark Fisher’s writing “Lions after slumber, what is sublimation today?”:

‘In post-liberal societies … the agency of social repression no longer acts in the guise of an internalized Law or Prohibition that requires renunciation or self-control; instead, it assumes the form of a hypnotic agency that imposes the attitude of “yielding to temptation” – that is to say, its injunction amounts to a command: “Enjoy yourself!” Such an idiotic enjoyment is dictated by the social environment which includes the Anglo-Saxon psychoanalyst whose main goal is to render the patient capable of “normal”, “healthy” pleasures. Society requires us to fall asleep into a hypnotic trance…’
– Zizek, ‘The Deadlock of Repressive Desublimation’, in The Metastases of Enjoyment, 16

422

Mainstream misrepresentation of reality (illusionary) science lies by claiming that attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes cancel out.No they don’t.They are vibratory interacted to balance mass out.

Mainstream science has taken the philosophical lie that attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes cancel out and have built a whole science around this cognitively biased starting philosophy which does not explain representation of reality (non illusionary) science at all.