Free will and determinism

[Dan1988]

All decisions we make are determined by existing and prior influences. There has been an effectively infinite chain of events which has resulted in me sitting here writing this sentence. They have all led to this point. From the major events - I was born at a specific time and place, to the minor ones - it's raining today, to the seemingly inconsequential - I broke a string on my guitar last night.

There is no way that existence cannot be described other than determined.

The question is then not whether we make decisions that affect the trajectory of future events - I obviously decided to do this rather than something else. But if free will is defined as the ability to make decisions that are not determined by prior events and we could rerun the last hour exactly as it happened and make a different decision, then something actually needs to be different. But rerunning it exactly as it happened means that nothing is different.

So free will cannot be compatible with determinism. And if existence is deterministic then free will is an illusion.

I would say that free will is an illusion, everyone makes choices based on their nature and that's something nobody can change about themselves.

A criminal doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to become a law abiding citizen. A child predator doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to stop being sexually attracted to children. A wicked person doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to become good person.

Some criminals may show outward signs of a change of will, when they are put before a judge, but that outward kind of change is fake. Most put on the act in order to receive a reduced prison sentence, but they are still the same person and remain unchanged on the inside.

I believe everyone is true to their nature, the wicked man makes decisions based on his conciseness and a good man is bound by his conscience to do good. Nobody can change who they are, we don't have access to the programing of the soul so we can't make any changes

 

[Bradskii]

I would say that free will is an illusion, everyone makes choices based on their nature and that's something nobody can change about themselves.

A criminal doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to become a law abiding citizen. A child predator doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to stop being sexually attracted to children. A wicked person doesn't have the free will to reprogram himself to become good person.

Some criminals may show outward signs of a change of will, when they are put before a judge, but that outward kind of change is fake. Most put on the act in order to receive a reduced prison sentence, but they are still the same person and remain unchanged on the inside.

I believe everyone is true to their nature, the wicked man makes decisions based on his conciseness and a good man is bound by his conscience to do good. Nobody can change who they are, we don't have access to the programing of the soul so we can't make any changes

How does all that tie in with the concept of a soul? And/or the idea that God gave us free will so we could choose Him or not.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

But if free will is defined as the ability to make decisions that are not determined by prior events and we could rerun the last hour exactly as it happened and make a different decision, then something actually needs to be different. But rerunning it exactly as it happened means that nothing is different.

Eze 18:14-18 "If, however, he begets a son Who sees all the sins which his father has done, And considers but does not do likewise; Who has not eaten on the mountains, Nor lifted his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, Nor defiled his neighbor's wife; Has not oppressed anyone, Nor withheld a pledge, Nor robbed by violence, But has given his bread to the hungry And covered the naked with clothing; Who has withdrawn his hand from the poor And not received usury or increase, But has executed My judgments And walked in My statutes He shall not die for the iniquity of his father; He shall surely live! "As for his father, Because he cruelly oppressed, Robbed his brother by violence, And did what is not good among his people, Behold, he shall die for his iniquity.

The Bible shows us with regard to morality, or the moral direction we take in life, that we can "consider", "see", or "choose". As for determinism in Christianity, I have written a free online book on the topic, showing that free will choices is a more logical way to interperate the Bible for the Christian. The Way and Free Will

 

[Bradskii]

The Bible shows us with regard to morality, or the moral direction we take in life, that we can "consider", "see", or "choose".

We do indeed consider our options and choose what we think is the best option. Nobody is denying that.

How do you reconcile your view with Augustine's argument that every event has a cause (leading to the ultimate cause). Was he incorrect? Or would you ignore his argument and only accept those from the first 150 years of Christianity (as per your book)?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

We do indeed consider our options and choose what we think is the best option. Nobody is denying that.

How do you reconcile your view with Augustine's argument that every event has a cause (leading to the ultimate cause). Was he incorrect? Or would you ignore his argument and only accept those from the first 150 years of Christianity (as per your book)?

Augustine like us had to rely upon books alone, he was seperated by many 100's of years from the Early Church. He was not aquainted by close proximity to the Early Church or its teachings. That is why I strongly emphisize the first 150 years of Christian Tradition. The early years of Christian teaching all speak strongly of free will in man.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Although I strongly support free will in man, and our responsibility for our actions. The Bible shows that much of our life is predetermined, God has a plan, but how we act in response to what He has set, will determine our outcome. You may be too young to know of it, but when I was in High School there were text computer games. You would see a prompt, choose a response, then the game would progress a long the lines of what you had chosen. There is no doubt that the story was authored, under the control of the designer. Yet we made genuine choices. Our choice leads to a different story. God's story is similar. It allows for our actions, and genuine choices regarding morality and our salvation.

 

[Bradskii]

Augustine like us had to rely upon books alone, he was seperated by many 100's of years from the Early Church.

That every event has a cause is not church teaching. He wasn't relying on it. He was stating something that he took as being obvious and seeing where it led. Do you think that there are uncaused events? I've been asking for some examples...maybe you can be the first to suggest one.

 

[Bradskii]

Although I strongly support free will in man, and our responsibility for our actions. The Bible shows that much of our life is predetermined, God has a plan, but how we act in response to what He has set, will determine our outcome. You may be too young to know of it, but when I was in High School there were text computer games. You would see a prompt, choose a response, then the game would progress a long the lines of what you had chosen. There is no doubt that the story was authored, under the control of the designer. Yet we made genuine choices. Our choice leads to a different story. God's story is similar. It allows for our actions, and genuine choices regarding morality and our salvation.

Yeah, I remember those games. The point I'd make is that the outcome couldn't be predicted but the result had been determined.

 

[durangodawood]

I think that consciousness - what is feels like to be me, is an unknown. But I think that the decision making process is separate from that. We know what happens at the level of neurons and synapses. And we mostly know why things happen - we walk to the fridge because we're hungry.

This relates to philosophical zombies. A person who is able to make decisions and is indistinguishable from anyone else but has no conscious self. The decision making process would still operate but would all be done without any conscious thought. Which is mostly what we do anyway.

I dont claim that consciousness rules every human decision. As you note, we make lots of decisions instinctively, barely conscious enough to even notice we're simply following appetites. Living that way lets habit take hold and we're along for the ride.

But... when we elevate decision making to a conscious level, then we engage another process. I dont think we have a firm grip on how conscious deliberation fully works. And its in this process where free will could reside.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

That every event has a cause is not church teaching. He wasn't relying on it. He was stating something that he took as being obvious and seeing where it led. Do you think that there are uncaused events? I've been asking for some examples...maybe you can be the first to suggest one.

I guess I return to this scripture:

Eze 18:14-18 "If, however, he begets a son Who sees all the sins which his father has done, And considers but does not do likewise; Who has not eaten on the mountains, Nor lifted his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, Nor defiled his neighbor's wife; Has not oppressed anyone, Nor withheld a pledge, Nor robbed by violence, But has given his bread to the hungry And covered the naked with clothing; Who has withdrawn his hand from the poor And not received usury or increase, But has executed My judgments And walked in My statutes He shall not die for the iniquity of his father; He shall surely live! "As for his father, Because he cruelly oppressed, Robbed his brother by violence, And did what is not good among his people, Behold, he shall die for his iniquity.

We would think that a son brought up in a house of sin was "pre-disposed" to become a sinner. But the Bible shows, a person can "choose", which enables them to bypass any first cause. God gives us this power. Otherwise, He would not be just. A God who forces us into a pathway of sin is unjust. A God who gives a redemptive path to all is just.

 

[Bradskii]

I dont claim that consciousness rules every human decision. As you note, we make lots of decisions instinctively, barely conscious enough to even notice we're simply following appetites. Living that way lets habit take hold and we're along for the ride.

But... when we elevate decision making to a conscious level, then we engage another process. I dont think we have a firm grip on how conscious deliberation fully works. And its in this process where free will could reside.

I have some rough idea how this sentence gets to appear on your screen the minute I hit 'Post Reply'. But I don't need to know the exact details to realise that what I am doing will have an affect on you in some way and cause you to react. Those are the actions we need to to consider when we ask ourselves if my actions determine yours. There is nothing in my laptop that sends the message or in the satellite that routes it or your terminal that changes what I do and how you react.

Even if someone from the 18th century was shown how to do it they may consider it supernatural. But they'd only need to consider the cause and effect of message itself. I could send you an email or even snail mail and the process would be different but the cause and effect would remain.

I see your argument as suggesting that we don't know enough about how the message gets from Bondi to Colorado. I'd argue that we don't need to. Knowing how it works would be like knowing how consciousness works. It wouldn't change anything.

 

[Bradskii]

We would think that a son brought up in a house of sin was "pre-disposed" to become a sinner.

If someone had been brought up in a situation where violence and theft were commonplace, been brought up by alcoholic and drug addicted parents, where the person had been violently beaten as a child on a regular basis and had been sexually assaulted by his father, who received no formal education and had a low IQ, then would you think that all those facts, over which he had no control, could be used as mitigation should he be charged with some offence? Stealing a car perhaps?

 

[Dan1988]

How does all that tie in with the concept of a soul? And/or the idea that God gave us free will so we could choose Him or not.

Adam was the only man created with a free will, until he sinned and lost his free will and became enslaved to Satan. Since the fall of Adam, all of humanity has been born into slavery to Satan. Everyone is born with a sin nature, as such we all gravitate towards sin and wickedness, Mans fallen nature keeps him under the power of sin, so man can't change his nature. Only God can do that.

Nobody has ever chosen God, we all naturally hate God and remain his enemies for life, unless He regenerates us and saves us. We naturally can't deny the flesh, so we reject God and serve our carnal desires. The natural "unconverted" man has no desire to serve God, because he loves his sin too much to forsake it.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

If someone had been brought up in a situation where violence and theft were commonplace, been brought up by alcoholic and drug addicted parents, where the person had been violently beaten as a child on a regular basis and had been sexually assaulted by his father, who received no formal education and had a low IQ, then would you think that all those facts, over which he had no control, could be used as mitigation should he be charged with some offence? Stealing a car perhaps?

Of course, there is room to consider a person's past in their actions. But the point I make is that according to God, one can change their stripes, they are not predetermined, or forced into a certain way of acting. It is a power God gives us. He can bring emotional healing. God allows for the brokenness of people to be expressed, but also brings comfort and healing to them, so they are not locked into the past.

 

[o_mlly]

Thanks for the constructive input.

As always, you are welcome.

You consider the evidence ... I decided ... then you automatically ...

Here's some more constructive input: the above is self-contradictory.

 

[durangodawood]

I have some rough idea how this sentence gets to appear on your screen the minute I hit 'Post Reply'. But I don't need to know the exact details to realise that what I am doing will have an affect on you in some way and cause you to react. Those are the actions we need to to consider when we ask ourselves if my actions determine yours. There is nothing in my laptop that sends the message or in the satellite that routes it or your terminal that changes what I do and how you react.

I think youre pre-concluding that the workings of the human mind are "mechanical" enough to be compared to internet communications.

Even if someone from the 18th century was shown how to do it they may consider it supernatural. But they'd only need to consider the cause and effect of message itself. I could send you an email or even snail mail and the process would be different but the cause and effect would remain.

Remember that A C Clarke quote "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" ? Thats what we might be considering here, in a way. The human mind might be doing amazing and as-yet incomprehensible things like uncaused-cause free-will to the point that youd call the free-will hypothesis supernatural dualism. Or in other words: magic.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I have some rough idea how this sentence gets to appear on your screen the minute I hit 'Post Reply'. But I don't need to know the exact details to realise that what I am doing will have an affect on you in some way and cause you to react. Those are the actions we need to to consider when we ask ourselves if my actions determine yours. There is nothing in my laptop that sends the message or in the satellite that routes it or your terminal that changes what I do and how you react.

Even if someone from the 18th century was shown how to do it they may consider it supernatural. But they'd only need to consider the cause and effect of message itself. I could send you an email or even snail mail and the process would be different but the cause and effect would remain.

I see your argument as suggesting that we don't know enough about how the message gets from Bondi to Colorado. I'd argue that we don't need to. Knowing how it works would be like knowing how consciousness works. It wouldn't change anything.

So, Bradskii, as the good, diversely minded reader and researcher that I know you are, what other, competing scholars have you engaged by which to appraise critically the quality of Sapolsky's thesis?

Thus far, I'm not seeing much in the way of comparative or contrasting arguments being brought to the fore in your own discussion to show that you've been mindfully, even painfully aware of other scientific views on the Determinism/Free-Will debate. I'd hate to think that arriving at Sapolsky is simply the culmination of a deliberate inclination toward Confirmation Bias (which, as you know, we Christians are just all too happy to indulge in ... )

 

[Bradskii]

Of course, there is room to consider a person's past in their actions.

This is generally the point I am making. Perhaps we only differ in the degree to which we make allowances.

 

[Bradskii]

As always, you are welcome.

Here's some more constructive input: the above is self-contradictory.

How many times will I have to repeat this: Making a decision does not equate with free will. Can you please take that on board.

 

[Bradskii]

I think youre pre-concluding that the workings of the human mind are "mechanical" enough to be compared to internet communications.

The process is to all extents mechanical. We actually know how it works.

Remember that A C Clarke quote "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" ? Thats what we might be considering here, in a way. The human mind might be doing amazing and as-yet incomprehensible things like uncaused-cause free-will to the point that youd call the free-will hypothesis supernatural dualism. Or in other words: magic.

It's what so many people believe already. They think it's what I would term supernatural. That there's something 'magical' happening somewhere. They might call it the soul. I have no reason to think it exists.