Do we truly have Free Will?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RiddleMeThis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RiddleMeThis

Guest
This is an interesting question and has resulted in my semi-return to Faith.

A point that you must ask yourself when talking about free will must be, what happened to Judas Iscariot the betrayer of Jesus? The man who betrayed Jesus to the Romans. Where does he sit now? In heaven, or surly Hell for the betrayal of his Mentor? To push that question further, where are all the “Evil” people that have ever died? Adolf Hitler must surely be in Hell. Except that Jesus died for everyones sins not just the Popes, and the everyday people, who did Jesus invite to dinner? The local patriarchs, no he invited the most despised man around, the tax collector.

Over the course of a few years, I have come to a few different conclusions.
  1. God exists.
  2. We have no choice over the actions we take.
  3. God is Just, and EVERYONE goes to heaven.
  4. The only free will we have is Interpretation
    .
    First,I believe that God exists, because I know I have a soul, the inner spark within me that makes me aware. This awareness gives me the only choice I have, and believe it or not that choice is not in my actions.
Second, I do not believe in free will, things are meant to happen a certain way, and will unfold according to… (survey says) Gods Plan. The book What if considers what would happen “if”. One of its articles deals with the survival of Jesus Christ, and how differently Catholicism would be today. It must be said and agreed upon the the death of Jesus Christ is the center of the Christian religions. For catholicism to be the “One True Church” Jesus had to die. Which brings me back to Judas, did he truly have free will not to follow Gods plan? If God is infallible and he planned on Jesus being crucified for our sins, then how could Judas NOT have done what he did; and certainly if he had no choice in Gods plan, how can any of us?

Which leads me to third, that EVERYONE goes to heaven. As stated above Jesus died for everyone sins. If you accept that basic belief, then babies don’t need to be baptized, as Jesus has already washed away original sin, which accounts for all other religions, even those who do not even acknowledge Jesus or God. Which brings me back to the “Monsters” of History, Pontius Pilate, the condemner of Jesus, Judas Iscariot the betrayer of Jesus, Adolf Hitler, serial killers, rapist, murders, and every other form of low life that has EVER existed, they all had “effects” on people, which in turn effects other people and so on, in ways that we cannot possibly imagine. I believe that something good comes from everything, and that good can multiply itself by unknown factors, if we make the one choice we have.

It is at this point I get to my fourth conclusion. The only free will we have is Interpretation. (and don’t tell anyone else, but here is where I found The Secret to Happiness that everyone is looking for) Viktor Frankl knew better than anyone that anything can happen to you, and almost always there is nothing you can do to prevent it. The CHOICE you have is not how you react, but how you interpret what just happened. Once you change you mind set, to always assume positive intent, and make the choice interpret others actions in that way you reaction will become a forgone conclusion. How could you assume positive intent on that comment your husband made that could go either good or bad, and still be upset. “You look pretty today.” can be interpreted in 2 general ways, as a positive comment about how someone looks, or a back handed comment on how bad they look every other day. This example is easy, and is always taken as a compliment, but what about the guy that cuts you off in traffic, can you assume positive intent there? Did he not see you there? Were you speeding? What happened that resulted in you getting cut off? What happened in his day that made him cut you off? No one will ever really know, but if you choose to interpret positive intent, or at least in this case lack of negative intent, you wont get angry and yell or do something that comes from assuming negative intent. When enough people realize that they have only one true choice, they can decide how they want to live their life, happy with the choice to see the world around you in a good light, or unhappy b/c they look for a slight everywhere they go. If you assume positive intent, then you wont have a negative reaction. It is here that our choice ends, if you believe in God and in His plan, you then can act only in such a way that reflects those beliefs, which believe it or not works into Gods plan.

A.N. Even when negative intent is evident, by choosing the positive interpretation we can choose not to let that negative event effect the “Positive Intent Mind Frame”, which over all leads to happiness, and what I have experienced only once, a sense of complete internal peace, a result in my own internal epiphany.
 

A point that you must ask yourself when talking about free will must be, what happened to Judas Iscariot the betrayer of Jesus…
If we do that we run the risk of thinking we are better judges of moral character than God is - and this, based on exceedingly skimpy evidence - particularly in comparison to the evidence available to One who is omniscient.

The best reference point we have for free will is ourselves – not someone else. We’ll never be able to understand in someone else that which we haven’t already experienced and understood in ourselves. God Himself bows before the free will He has given us. Our free will is sacred. Without free will, we could never truly love…All our actions and movements of the heart would be dependent on or induced/influenced by exterior forces.

Furthermore we will never know what went on in Judas’ mind (half the time we can’t even clearly tell what’s going on in our own minds) . Even psychiatrists who question the existence of God will tell you that everyone is responsible for their own actions ; no free will – no responsibility.

If a person didn’t have free will, they would never be able to come to these conclusions :

Over the course of a few years, I have come to a few different conclusions.
  1. God exists.
  2. We have no choice over the actions we take.
  3. God is Just, and EVERYONE goes to heaven.
  4. The only free will we have is Interpretation
and even though with my own free will, I must strongly disagree with those same “conclusions” , the very fact that they have been posted contradicts their import .


Which leads me to third, that EVERYONE goes to heaven. …
[Matt. 7:20-21]

“Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.
So by their fruits you will know them.

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

:hmmm:

It is a good intention to wish that everyone should go to Heaven, but absolute free will means also the possibility that souls might become so hardened that they would actually say “No” to God eternally - fully aware of the consequences ; not unlike what happened with the fallen angels.
 
We need to be clear about what we mean by free will before we can say whether or not we have it. For example, I’m skeptical that most libertarian formulations of free will are even coherent, much less true. On the other hand, we clearly have experiences which people commonly describe as “decision-making.” If that’s all we mean by free will, then of course we have it, since we have those experiences of making decisions.

Now, people often tie responsibility into this, but that issue is just a personal preference of ours. In the end, whether or not we wish to hold people responsible for their actions is up to us. It’s something we do, not a matter of fact, and so there is no correct or incorrect answer to it—and it needn’t involve considerations regarding free will.
 
Perhaps you might offer us your “working definition” of free will ?
 
To keep it a little simpler, here’s the definition I’m using from this link
catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=33656

FREE WILL:

The power of the will to determine itself and to act of itself, without compulsion from within or coercion from without. It is the faculty of an intelligent being to act or not act, to act this way or another way, and is therefore essentially different from the operations of irrational beings that merely respond to a stimulus and are conditioned by sensory objects.

*All items in this dictionary are from Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary, © Eternal Life. Used with permission.

Either responsible for actions…or not , in this case would seem to resemble either pitting cause and effect against fatalism or, at least, attempting to define cause and effect through the eyes of fatalism.
 
Perhaps you might offer us your “working definition” of free will ?
Well, like I said, free will can refer to the experiences we have which are commonly labeled as decision-making.

In order to give a more reduced account, I take a subjective idealist approach: By will we mean the activity of consciousness, especially towards controlling experiences. By free will, then, we mean the successful control of those experiences.

If you’re unfamiliar with subjective idealism, we might instead formulate a materialist alternative: Under materialism, free will may refer to the successful engagement of an intelligent organism in a voluntary behavior. The problem with the materialist explanation, of course, is that it takes consciousness for granted. Reductive materialists might have serious issues with that. But since I am a subjective idealist, it’s not a difficulty for me. ; )
 
@OP: You seem to pit Divine Providence against the notion of free will. That temptation has existed before and I think the reason for it is that we live in a 4D-world (3 space dimensions, 1 time dimension) where such things would seem to contradict each other, but we must remember that God is infinitely dimensional and that the traditional Catholic response to the question of Divine Providence and free will is not either-or but rather both-and. The elect are certainly predestined to Heaven by God, but they have at the same time merited Heaven through their free-willed cooperation with divine grace. I heard a good comparison with the concept of projection in mathematics. If you project a 2-dimensional object on to a 1-dimensional plane you can see different lengths in the one dimension that seem to contradict each other: at first the object seems like it’s an inch, then it looks like it’s two inches. But the contradiction is only an appearance, because the 2-dimensional object is both one inch wide and two inches long. The same for our conception of Providence and free will. We need to affirm both.
 
Well, like I said, free will can refer to the experiences we have which are commonly labeled as decision-making.

In order to give a more reduced account, I take a subjective idealist approach: By will we mean the activity of consciousness, especially towards controlling experiences. By free will, then, we mean the successful control of those experiences.

If you’re unfamiliar with subjective idealism, we might instead formulate a materialist alternative: Under materialism, free will may refer to the successful engagement of an intelligent organism in a voluntary behavior. The problem with the materialist explanation, of course, is that it takes consciousness for granted. Reductive materialists might have serious issues with that. But since I am a subjective idealist, it’s not a difficulty for me. ; )
Yes I’m unfamiliar with subjective idealism (and about a million other things - see my user name 🙂 ) . Neither can I say I have a passion for philosophy , but my spiritual director had put it to me this way : “Philosophy is a way of thinking. In your case it might be helpful to be reminded that it isn’t the only way of thinking.”

So that’s likely my approach - an attempt to communicate philosophically at best.

Thanks for the explanation hatsoff. It helps me get a partial at least on where you’re coming from. Of course my terminology in post #2 wouldn’t have been “tailor made” for you then, since RiddleMeThis claims to believe in God. So the definition of free will which I was applying is the one corresponding to the Catholic faith.

The way this part was meant
… Even psychiatrists who question the existence of God will tell you that everyone is responsible for their own actions ; no free will – no responsibility…
And in relation to your quote -

Now, people often tie responsibility into this, but that issue is just a personal preference of ours. In the end, whether or not we wish to hold people responsible for their actions is up to us. It’s something we do, not a matter of fact, and so there is no correct or incorrect answer to it—and it needn’t involve considerations regarding free will.
…My reference wasn’t meant so much concerning imputation of guilt or whether an act is inherently good or evil , which is why I didn’t say “No free will – no accountability” . I was focusing more on something (an act of free will) being responsible for an effect. All our actions/decisions have consequences (even should they be almost minute or imperceptible) otherwise they would not be actions or decisions.

So what you would refer to as a “successful engagement of an intelligent organism in a voluntary behavior” , I would call a “deliberate act” because this would include consideration of the consequences or effects of the particular movement of behavior.

In Catholicism, our free will is thought of as a “given”. No free will – no need for Confession – no Ten Commandments – no Eucharist. No free will – no real free ability to know , love and serve God, period . In it’s truest sense, to obey requires an assent of our free will. For example, the passage from scripture quoted earlier -

[Matt 7:21]

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven” …

Implies that an assent of our free will is necessary before we can do the will of our Father in Heaven .

And it can be difficult for Catholics to see philosophy making any sense outside of God as Saint Paul says :

[Acts 17:28]
For ‘In him we live and move and have our being,’ as even some of your poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top