Free Will can only be a result of a Creator

[warpspeedpetey]

in a purely scientific, material universe governed by the laws of physics and mathematics Free Will is impossible.

if one has a complete knowledge of the position, direction, and speed of every particle in the universe, at the moment of creation and enough processing power to calculate their subsequent interaction than one can use those tools to determine the end state and any point in between.

by that reckoning than nothing could be any different than it already is, all particle motion is predetermined from the starting state of the universe

not even the electro-chemical interactions of the brain could be separated from these mathematical chains.

therefore Free Will is by necessity, a created quality.

 

[grannymh]

Dear warpspeedpetey,

Say what?

in a purely scientific, material universe governed by the laws of physics and mathematics Free Will is impossible.

 

[MegaTherion]

Though we certainly feel as if we have free will, nothing precludes this feeling from co-existing with a deterministic universe under a compatibilist model.

So the assertion of the thread is incorrect. Free will does not only have to be the result of a Creator.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Though we certainly feel as if we have free will, nothing precludes this feeling from co-existing with a deterministic universe under a compatibilist model.

So the assertion of the thread is incorrect. Free will does not only have to be the result of a Creator.

your just saying here, that there is no reason free will can’t be an illusion, technically correct.

however, then you are asking us to believe in a universe where uncountable numbers of causes and effects happen in just such a way as to perfectly fake free will. with no mistakes ever recorded in all of human history.

though mathematically possible, in an ideal system, to show these astronomical odds we would not have enough space in all the world to print the zeros necessary to show how bad the odds are in favor of that.

while barely mathematically possible, in practice that would be an impossibility.

further, if a copy of free will were absolutely perfect, than it would be actual free will.

so, either, we actually have free will or, the universe is structured in such a way as to fool us, perfectly, over a darn near infinite number of events…

im going to go with free will being real, or such an absolutely perfect copy of free will that it is actually free will

either way if free will is real, then it is an effect that cannot be accounted for by any physical process, leaving only non-physical(supernatural) effect

 

[jack_apologetic]

I like the line of reasoning you use, however, I think your conclusion is a little confusing. Are you saying that only free will is created, and the physical world of cause and effect are not? If that’s true, does that put the physical world on the same level as God, since both are uncreated?

I think its confusing to isolate free will as being created, without also showing why the physical world must also be created.

However, I think another related conclusion that we garner from this physical cause and effect chain is that free will originates outside the physical world. Thus the proof would go as follows:

1. We have free will (this requires an argument of its own, but lets assume it for now)
2. Free will cannot be determined, otherwise it wouldn’t be free
3. The physical world is determined (because of the cause and effect chain that you illustrated above - even brain reactions are merely physical cause and effect chains)
4. Therefore free will cannot be within the physical world

Thus free will, is in essence, proof for the existence of the supernatural in every person, which we can call the soul.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

What about the world we actually live in? How is that described

i prefer mathematically

This sounds like the description of the Creator. However, since none of us are the Creator and we don’t have complete knowledge, it looks like we need to have some ability, free will, to choose among all the possible particles etc. Since none of us go around giving birthday presents of free will, how do we come by free will and when?

thats the crux of the matter, if the atheists are right, we shouldnt be able to, yet we obviously do, the mechanism is unknown, i like to believe some sort of superimposition of the supernatural over the deterministic physical. if QM were the reason, than the ultimate outcome of any free will event would have to be random, which is where my thoughts on the matter are now going.

By putting the concept of free will in a scientific context, does that exclude the philosophical concept that the use of free will determine what happens after death?

no, at least in my model people still exercise actual free will, and are responsible for their exercise thereof.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I like the line of reasoning you use, however, I think your conclusion is a little confusing. Are you saying that only free will is created, and the physical world of cause and effect are not? If that’s true, does that put the physical world on the same level as God, since both are uncreated?

I think its confusing to isolate free will as being created, without also showing why the physical world must also be created.

However, I think another related conclusion that we garner from this physical cause and effect chain is that free will originates outside the physical world. Thus the proof would go as follows:

1. We have free will (this requires an argument of its own, but lets assume it for now)
2. Free will cannot be determined, otherwise it wouldn’t be free
3. The physical world is determined (because of the cause and effect chain that you illustrated above - even brain reactions are merely physical cause and effect chains)
4. Therefore free will cannot be within the physical world

Thus free will, is in essence, proof for the existence of the supernatural in every person, which we can call the soul.

an excellent restatement of the op! you got it first time, brilliant!

that said, i think that free will is not so much a created thing as, it is a disorder in the apparent determinism of the universe. and as the original OP is old, i now think the best statement is that free will proves the existence of the supernatural, as in non-physical. someone will eventually point out that you cant call the source of the effect the Creator so i just avoid it and go with supernatural(non-physical)

 

[jack_apologetic]

Though we certainly feel as if we have free will, nothing precludes this feeling from co-existing with a deterministic universe under a compatibilist model.

So the assertion of the thread is incorrect. Free will does not only have to be the result of a Creator.

Actually, it is incompatible. For the following reason:

If we are determined, than we would not believe we had free will.

Why?

1. Anything that is determined is merely the effect of a cause before it.
2. An effect cannot consist of different components than the cause. That is to say if you put 1 and 1 together, you can only get 2, not 3. Since 3 would consist of more components than its cause (1 and 1). Or to put another way, if you put yellow and red together, you get orange, and you cannot get green, since green consists of different components.
3. A thought about free will, would be the effect of a cause before it.
4. In a determined universe, free will would not exist
5. Causes can only consist of those things that actually exist.
6. Therefore, Causes cannot consist of free will.
7. Therefore, Effects, since they cannot consist than more than there causes, cannot consist of free will
8. Therefore, there could be no thoughts of free will

This is a rough and fast proof, so please let me know any problems with it.

 

[Dameedna]

in a purely scientific, material universe governed by the laws of physics and mathematics Free Will is impossible.

if one has a complete knowledge of the position, direction, and speed of every particle in the universe, at the moment of creation and enough processing power to calculate their subsequent interaction than one can use those tools to determine the end state and any point in between.

Quantum mechanics might have something to say about this, lol

You should read more about it Warp. I think you’d enjoy it.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Quantum mechanics might have something to say about this, lol

You should read more about it Warp. I think you’d enjoy it.

the point is that i dont think that QM can, i have vacillated over the issue a number of times, though the quantum level may be a convenient place to ‘break’ determinism, by its nature it would seem to be excluded.

think about it, if an indeterminate event is the originator of ‘free will’ then the outcome of that event must necessarily be indeterminate also. there would seem to be no point at which a deterministic outcome is possible.

so if QM were an instigating factor, or the point where determinism is broken, then it would seem that outcome of any free will event must also be random.

 

[grannymh]

Quantum mechanics might have something to say about this, lol

You should read more about it Warp. I think you’d enjoy it.

Dear Dameedna,

Good to find you here.

I was trying to reply to your post 320 in the thread, The Omnipotency Contradiction, but decided I would be going off topic. That post contained a reference to reconciling science and religion. I’m looking at that idea but from a totally off the wall perspective. My problem is that I need a replacement word for religion. Religion is too narrow for today’s world.

Now I’m thinking that if there isn’t an understanding of free will and its origin, the possibility of reconciliation between the two disciplines becomes less and less. This is because technically without at least a concept of free will as an ability, the alternate, determinism, would be rather limiting.

Blessings,
granny

 

[MegaTherion]

however, then you are asking us to believe in a universe where uncountable numbers of causes and effects happen in just such a way as to perfectly fake free will. with no mistakes ever recorded in all of human history.

What exactly do you mean by “mistakes”? We know that the universe unfolded in such a way that eventually creatures with self-consciousness arose on our little planet out here on a wing of the Milky Way. This self-consciousness comes with the illusion of free-will.

Actually, I think jack_apologetic is right that my view would be incompatibilist.

 

[grannymh]

What exactly do you mean by “mistakes”? We know that the universe unfolded in such a way that eventually creatures with self-consciousness arose on our little planet out here on a wing of the Milky Way. This self-consciousness comes with the illusion of free-will.

Actually, I think jack_apologetic is right that my view would be incompatibilist.

And what is self-consciousness – really? Cogito ergo sum?

 

[warpspeedpetey]

What exactly do you mean by “mistakes”?

by mistake i mean that one does not will one thing to happen and either nothing, or another thing happens, with no physical reason.

for instance you dont meet a friend and mean to say ‘hello’ but instead say ‘purple posies’, or ‘goodnight Gracie’, or for that matter deliver the Gettysburg address. and if you did you would go to the doctor.

We know that the universe unfolded in such a way that eventually creatures with self-consciousness arose on our little planet out here on a wing of the Milky Way. This self-consciousness comes with the illusion of free-will.

other than the practical impossibility of such, why would free will be the illusion? self-consciousness would be slave to the same mathematical determinism as the rest of the universe.

in other words self consciousness could easily be the real illusion.

maybe Descartes should have said , ‘cogito ergo cogito sum’
or ’ i think, therefore i think i am’

 

[MegaTherion]

by mistake i mean that one does not will one thing to happen and either nothing, or another thing happens, with no physical reason.

The idea that you’re trying to convey here would not happen in a determinist universe.

Look, let’s make it simple: everything that’s happened so far in the universe has resulted in my willing to type this post; the brain sends a signal to the hands; the hands press the correct keys; I type the post. I feel like I’ve chosen to do this, but in fact I have not.

Where is there room for “mistakes”? [other than my pressing the wrong keys from time to time…which does happen!]

other than the practical impossibility of such, why would free will be the illusion? self-consciousness would be slave to the same mathematical determinism as the rest of the universe.

Well, first of all, it’s not impossible. It happened. Even if you believe that a god (or spirit or something) set the universe into motion, the universe has unfolded in such a way that self conscious beings eventually developed out here on a wing of the Milky Way.

What is self-consciousness? It’s a feeling that accompanies the development of an advanced intellect. It comes with a side order of “free-will-feeling.” And yes, in this view, it would be slave to determinism. All of our thoughts are determined, although they don’t always feel that way (sometimes they do…do you always choose what you think? or does your mind often wander on its own, triggered by stimuli?)

Note: I’ve been playing the determinist in this thread, but I feel compelled to point out that the kind of strict determinism I’ve been aping (and that you’ve been using as a foil) takes an extremely simplistic view of causality. I think it’s quite possible to argue that authentic “free will” could have emerged as our intellect developed.

But whether or not free will actually exists, what you concluded in your last post,

in other words self consciousness could easily be the real illusion.

doesn’t match your title: "Free Will can only be a result of a Creator.

I’ve demonstrated that you’re wrong – it’s not a case of “only.” It could be, sure, but it’s not “only.” Your argument is wrong.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

The idea that you’re trying to convey here would not happen in a determinist universe.

thats the point, we live in a universe in which the only evidence we have is of determinism. we live, as far as we actually know, in a deterministic universe.

Look, let’s make it simple: everything that’s happened so far in the universe has resulted in my willing to type this post; the brain sends a signal to the hands; the hands press the correct keys; I type the post. I feel like I’ve chosen to do this, but in fact I have not.

Where is there room for “mistakes”? [other than my pressing the wrong keys from time to time…which does happen!]

any time an event occurs upon which free will is determined, there is the opportunity for a mistake to occur, something other than what you will to occur actually happens for no other accountable reason. if free will is an illusion, it is one that is mistake free. if it a perfect facsimile than it is actual free will, either way free will must be true.

Well, first of all, it’s not impossible. It happened

.

thats what we are debating, whether or not it is more likely that free will is true, or out of amazingly bad odds, approaching near infinite, a universe just happens to exist for no reason (denied under Thomistic proofs), and further that said universe developed in such a way as to specifically fool billions of people into believing that they are exercising free will.

thats a huge stretch requiring more faith to believe than i have.

Even if you believe that a god (or spirit or something) set the universe into motion, the universe has unfolded in such a way that self conscious beings eventually developed out here on a wing of the Milky Way.

there is no logical way other than a non-physical cause, to explain the origin of the universe, as St. Thomas says, nothing physical can cause itself.

Note: I’ve been playing the determinist in this thread, but I feel compelled to point out that the kind of strict determinism I’ve been aping (and that you’ve been using as a foil) takes an extremely simplistic view of causality. I think it’s quite possible to argue that authentic “free will” could have emerged as our intellect developed.

first id like to say that causality it self is very simple, so simple in fact it can be almost perfectly mirrored in mathematics.

second, i dont see any mechanism by which ‘intellect’ could break the causal chains by which, on the particle level, we are mathematically bound.

But whether or not free will actually exists, what you concluded in your last post, doesn’t match your title: "Free Will can only be a result of a Creator.

one is a statement of concerning free will, the other a statement concerning self consciousness. apples and oranges, so to speak.

I’ve demonstrated that you’re wrong – it’s not a case of “only.” It could be, sure, but it’s not “only.” Your argument is wrong.

you have made no mention of any mechanism by which free will could be the result of any physical phenomenon. my position, is that all physical phenomenon may be excluded as the cause of free will, though the OP used the word ‘Creator’ it is an old OP and in threads since i have corrected it to be ‘supernatural’, simply in the non-physical sense of the word.

in order to show my argument wrong, according to your above statement, then one would need to show, that all physical causes cannot be excluded

 

[MegaTherion]

thats what we are debating, whether or not it is more likely that free will is true, or out of amazingly bad odds, approaching near infinite, a universe just happens to exist for no reason (denied under Thomistic proofs), and further that said universe developed in such a way as to specifically fool billions of people into believing that they are exercising free will.

No one is claiming that a universe “just happens to exist for no reason.” We don’t know what the reason is – we don’t have sufficient evidence to tell us what happened before the Big Bang.

Perhaps the cause of the universe is some physical law that we know nothing about. Perhaps the cause no longer exists. Perhaps matter has always existed. Perhaps the concept of “causality,” as we understand it, did not exist before the Big Bang (before time). Perhaps Cthulhu is real, and he and the Elder gods created the world. Perhaps the Hindu gods created the world. Perhaps the Christian god created the world. Perhaps the Zoroastrian gods created the world.

The only correct answer is that we do not know.

Now, what we do know is that life has developed into great diversity on this particular planet over the past four billion years or so. One species on this planet has developed a great deal of intelligence; accompanying that intelligence is a sense of free will that accompanies our actions. “Free will” may or may not exist objectively.

No faith required. Those are the facts.

I do not see anything about this system that could only be the work of the supernatural. I also see nothing about this system that makes it even remotely likely to be the result of the supernatural since there is no evidence whatsoever that anything supernatural exists.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

in a purely scientific, material universe governed by the laws of physics and mathematics Free Will is impossible.

if one has a complete knowledge of the position, direction, and speed of every particle in the universe, at the moment of creation and enough processing power to calculate their subsequent interaction than one can use those tools to determine the end state and any point in between.

by that reckoning than nothing could be any different than it already is, all particle motion is predetermined from the starting state of the universe

not even the electro-chemical interactions of the brain could be separated from these mathematical chains.

therefore Free Will is by necessity, a created quality.

Well, consider this:

Say there was no God, and the Universe really was a random creation from nothing for no reason known to us.

Life began on Earth due to just the right amount of distance from the Sun. Cells, bacteria, plants, etc, etc–you get the idea.

Along the lines, as the human species roams the Earth, there has to be a way of communication, a way of survival, and you have to find a way to ensure that the kids don’t wander around just anywhere, considering the many dangers.

Children are a curious bunch; they ask questions, they wonder what’s what and why this happens. At such a primitive time, you can only assume, the adults didn’t know themselves.

Myths are made up, stories are told, monsters are created to frighten them into place, and Higher Beings are imagined to give undying comfort… an imaginary friend.

Free will is spawned through curiosity. Humans may have natural instincts–that’s a given–but our own curiosities have evolved us into something more complex. We can choose to pursue this curiosity or we can choose not too; that’s probably ground zero from where Free Will comes from. But that’s just a theory.

Having an ultimate Creator could have merely been a way of saying, “I don’t know. I don’t know how this world came into place. I don’t know how or why we are alive, therefore, I will simply live and make the best of it, assuming I have a reason to live.” And with that idea, humans continuously take steps higher and higher on the food chain as discoveries are being made; after History is being created. However, there are those several people who chose not to act on their curiosities, therefore living a simple life. That is their Free Will.

The idea of a Creator is an excellent motivator. For all we know, it may be a set-up. Our primitive ancestors may have wanted order, and with order, you usually get corruption at some point. I’m not saying religion is entirely corrupt because it most certainly has it’s motivational moments as I already said, but that’s exactly the point:

It’s not the Creator who gave us free will, it may just be the desire to have a reason to live this Life, and the only way to have reason in this Life is by believing in something that above and unknown to us… even if, it may not be there.

But that’s just a theory.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Perhaps the cause of the universe is some physical law that we know nothing about.

thats the point of Thomistic proofs, nothing physical could possibly be the cause. nothing can cause itself. from that we can exclude all physical possibilities

Perhaps matter has always existed.

thats not a possibility for several reasons, no proof of anything physical existing pre-expansion, no time pre-expansion, etc.

Perhaps the concept of “causality,” as we understand it, did not exist before the Big Bang (before time)

.

thats our argument in general

Perhaps Cthulhu is real, and he and the Elder gods created the world. Perhaps the Hindu gods created the world.

except there is only one substance, one would expect there to be more if there were more than one creator, further in Christianity creation is an act of G-ds Will, hindus multiple creation stories suggest that the universe was created from something pre-existing, cthulu is an alien.

Perhaps the Christian god created the world. Perhaps the Zoroastrian gods created the world.

zoroastrians also have more than one creation story, all involving the pre existence of something physical

The only correct answer is that we do not know.

its true that there may be a different supernatural explanation, but as a matter of logic it could not be anything physical, which also excludes the examples given above.

our existence is therefore proof of a supernatural, non-physical creation. unless you can demonstrate a manner in which something creates itself, and no one has ever been able to do that.

Now, what we do know is that life has developed into great diversity on this particular planet over the past four billion years or so. One species on this planet has developed a great deal of intelligence; accompanying that intelligence is a sense of free will that accompanies our actions. “Free will” may or may not exist objectively.

free will exists, the question is whether or not it is an illusion. even that question doesnt matter for the following reasons.

1. it may not be mathematically excluded but the odds that a universe would form from nothing, and take a shape such as to first give us a fake self-consciousness, and then further fake free will, and do so perfectly across an almost infinite number of events is ludicrous, one would have better odds of success if one were to throw a ball to the moon from the earth.
2. if against every thing, that then occurred it is a perfect copy of both self-consciousness, and free will, and there for it is actual self-consciousness and free will. after all if there is absolutely no difference between what is the real quality and what is not, then it doesnt matter which one you are exercising.

No faith required. Those are the facts.

to believe that, is to actually have faith in an impossible occurrence.

I do not see anything about this system that could only be the work of the supernatural. I also see nothing about this system that makes it even remotely likely to be the result of the supernatural since there is no evidence whatsoever that anything supernatural exists.

as you have not suggested any mechanism that would circumvent Thomistic proofs, i dont see how you can credibly say that. nothing can cause itself, if you cant get around that, you will always be left with only the supernatural, as a cause for the universe.

as to evidence of the supernatural, just as the above, one can infer Thomistically the evidence of the supernatural (non-physical) from the presence of the natural (physical)

it is further my contention that since we live in a deterministic universe, free will in itself is further proof of the supernatural(non-physical). in a purely deterministic universe, physical phenomenon cannot account for free will.

 

[reggieM]

it is further my contention that since we live in a deterministic universe, free will in itself is further proof of the supernatural(non-physical). in a purely deterministic universe, physical phenomenon cannot account for free will.

That sounds like a very good argument as I see it.

The atheistic-materialist universe has no place for free will since everything is determined by physical factors. The only reason we would cite free will is because we’re ignorant of the (supposed) real, physical causes of human decisions. Thus, there is no moral responsibility, no virtue, no courageous acts, no human values or accomplishments. Everything is merely the process of natural laws. Like a rock rolling down a hill. If we knew the precise weight of the rock, the slope of the hill, and the exact nature of the terrain and the strength of the force that first moved it – we would know precisely the exact path the rock would take all the way down.