Free will and causality chain

  • Thread starter Thread starter DavidCro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DavidCro

Guest
How does free will function?

If we have free will, according to the Thomist definition, our will is still determined by what are reason contains. But, again, our reason contains only that we have attained in already deterministic circumstances. For example - I was born in Germany, in a small family, went to a liberal school etc, so my reason will in the end be determined by society, biology and what not. And if our free will is determined by reason, than there cannot be free will.

And again, if freedom is only in goodness, then again, my choices are predetermined, and again I don’t have free will.

Help me sort this out, it’s very important to me. Thank you!
 
Dear DavidCro,
Perhaps after I respond, you can help me by explaining what you believe free will to be.

However, I can tell you that free will consists of the ability to choose how you act. Reason can go into how you decide to act, as can goodness, but those do not necessarily control your will.

For example, if you need money and decide to rob a bank, reason would tell you that you are likely to be caught and arrested, while goodness would tell you that you should not steal, and society would tell you that robbing a bank is wrong. However, if you still decide to rob that bank, you are acting against goodness, reason, and society, because you have the choice to follow any of those promptings, or to do the opposite, and rob the bank all the same.

So while the things you mentioned above might influence how you act, your free will is entirely free to act according to how you decide.
 
I don’t know what to think of free will. As far as I can understand, free will is my ability to choose both good and evil and for myself to affect the causality chain. I’m scared of the thought my reason is just a product of the causality chain, and I don’t see freedom in this. My reason is shaped by biology and society, and where am I (ego) in this? I can’t see my self anywhere. It’s very anxious thought, troubling me form months now. I’m scared to lose my faith for this.
 
You’re forgetting the Divine work in this.
The Logos we take up is by God.
The reason we have, the virtue we grow, is thanks to God.
 
Kei said:
You’re forgetting the Divine work in this.
The Logos we take up is by God.
The reason we have, the virtue we grow, is thanks to God.
Click to expand...
Then, where am I in this? If God improves my reason and moves my will, it’s not really my choosing. Or on the lower level, if I pray to God to improve my reason and move my will, what caused me to pray? If God caused me to pray, then again I have no free will.
 
Last edited:
DavidCro said:
If God improves my reason and moves my will, it’s not really my choosing. Or on the lower level, if I pray to God to improve my reason and move my will, what caused me to pray? If God caused me to pray, then again I have no free will.
Click to expand...
If God moves some natural force (e.g. rain), does that mean that the rain did not really occur via natural mechanisms?
 
Indeed, you do.

You are made in the Image of God and have the innate ability to choose.
 
It did occur via natural mechanism, which implies we are naturally mechanized, i. e. no free will.
 
And we’re circling the arguments. What made me to choose so? It’s my reason and will. What did cause my reason and will to allow God to work through me? You’d say, you grew in your reason to understand it’s beneficial for you. What caused this growth of reason, and so on and so on.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so if God being First Cause of natural causation does not vitiate it, then why would God being First Cause of the acts of the will vitiate free will?
 
The error is thinking that all causes produce only necessary effects, and that all effects are necessarily produced by their causes. Some effects can follow from causes in a contingent manner. A voluntary will is one such example. This doesn’t mean society won’t shape you or pre-dispose you to certain ends, but it does not have to be the case that every choice you make had to follow eith absolute necessity.
 
Arkansan said:
God being First Cause of natural causation does not vitiate it,
Click to expand...
The question is, how do you consider the term “free” in “free will”. If our will is inclined to do good, then really, there cannot be sin, because every time we choose the best option possible.
 
Last edited:
Wesrock said:
he error is thinking that all causes produce only necessary effects, and that all effects are necessarily produced by their causes. Some effects can follow from causes in a contingent manner. A voluntary will is one such example. This doesn’t mean society won’t shape you or pre-dispose you to certain ends, but it does not have to be the case that every choice you make had to follow eith ab
Click to expand...
Can you give an example where it doesn’t have to be the case that every choice I make doesn’t follow something precedent?
 
DavidCro said:
And we’re circling the arguments. What made me to choose so? It’s my reason and will. What did cause my reason and will to allow God to work through me? You’d say, you grew in your reason to understand it’s beneficial for you. What caused this growth of reason, and so on and so on.
Click to expand...
What caused your reason and will to allow God to work through you? You are separating yourself from your reason and will in a way that I don’t think corresponds with how they are to be viewed.
But, you are you. The ultimate choice, that we choose, do you allow God’s work through you or do you deny it?
 
All creatures, both rational and irrational, act for ends, but the difference is that rational creatures have the ability to consider the ends which they naturally seek and decide on the means to pursue them. This is the essence of free will.

We commit sin when we seek lesser goods over higher goods.
 
No. We choose a good in every situation. We don’t do an evil for the sake of evil, but for some good we achieve by doing so. For example: physical pleasure is a good, whether physical or emotional. We have a wide range of goods to choose from. The moral issue is when we seek a good by doing a moral evil. But the moral evil is not done as the end in itself, but as a means to obtain that good we’re seeking. Physical and emotional pleasure at the perversion of someone’s autonomy and integrity is a moral evil because a higher good is being perverted for the sake of a lesser good.
 
Then choosing a lesser good over the higher good would contradict reason. For say, at the moment when I chose lesser good, I was aware at the same time of a higher good. But still, my reason, being inclined to choose higher good (as saint Thomas Aquinas states), was compelled by something outside me to choose lesser good, or it was a random choice, which again excludes sin.
 
People don’t always act rationally. A rational creature has the power to convince themselves that some good which the will is drawn to pre-rationally, is in fact a fitting means to the end even when it should know otherwise.

The reason can be moved by things other than itself, but it cannot be compelled.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top