Is Freewill compatible with Determinism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MindOverMatter2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lisa44 said:
Because I cannot separate mind and body. I don’t have a sinful nature, and a godly mind.
I am one human sinful creature which means my thoughts and my body are the same. That is why Jesus says if you even look at a woman lustfully you have committed adultery.

Why? The person didn’t commit adultery with their body? How can they have committed adultery with the mind?

If the mind was “free”, or the will, from man’s sinful nature then man would not be a sinner because he could have a holy mind.

Is it possible to have a “holy” mind?
Click to expand...
A physical object is never sinful. Only a “will” is sinful.
 
Lisa44 said:
So a will is “free” and “sinful”? If it is free why is it sinful?
Click to expand...
I knew you would do this.

I did not mean that a will is a-prior sinful by nature all the time. Rather I mean that since the intellectual free will is the sufficient cause of its action, it is therefore morally responsible for its action.
 
Jaaanosik said:
Just remember that objective thinking as you defined it here stands on subjective thinking.
You can not bypass subjective thinking. Thinking about objective stuff goes through subjective thinking.
Click to expand...
This is why I said '“Thoughts, since this implies the mind being active, can be both objective and subjective.”

Granted that when we probe our memory bank, we can be influenced. Further granted is that our memory bank works constantly with or without our permission.

What do you think about this example? You see a particular chair in a furniture store. You check its price tag and then go home, look at your living space, smile to yourself because not only is the color of the chair your very favorite, but the color of the chair goes well with the walls. In addition, the chair reminds you of one in your childhood home.

You can buy the chair on the subjective basis that you really love it. Or you can dismiss the idea of buying the chair because the objective price tag, still on the chair in the store, is way more than you wanted to spend. The objective cost bypassed your desires.

Usually, I use the chair in the furniture store when discussing the basis for morality. My position is that “morality” is ultimately based on the objective fact that the human person is worthy of profound respect.

With your help, I think we can use this kind of objective example to show that real free will is not compatible with determinism. Maybe I can’t do this. I would like to try because I love new challenges. But first we need to understand that an objective truth does not depend on anyone’s belief or non-belief. An objective truth bypasses subjective thinking because it is independent of the person who is subjectively thinking.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
I knew you would do this.

I did not mean that a will is a-prior sinful by nature all the time. Rather I mean that since the intellectual free will is the sufficient cause of its action, it is therefore morally responsible for its action.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say it was sinful “all the time”. I said if it is free, then why is it sinful? I would like to be holy. I would like to have a holy mind. Can I do that with my free will? Since it is the cause of its action? Yes or no?

It’s ok if you believe the answer is yes. I just want to know what the logical result of having a free will is.
 
Why should one worry about the relation between free will and determinism if there is no determinism?

Consider an argument against determinism:
  1. Quantum Mechanics
The notion here is that all scientific laws are probabilistic in nature, not causal. Furthermore, this probabilistic nature of the laws is not due to a lack of knowledge on our part. The no hidden variable argument has shown this indeterminancy is, so to speak, inherent in the universe. Yet, if there is no causality in this way, there is no determinism. This is not to say, however, that there might not be a sort of causality that does exist albeit not in the realm of the scientific.

Free will. Here is an argument for it:
  1. Man has a tendency toward evil (original sin).
  2. Man has as his ultimate end however, God.
  3. It is possible for man to reach his ultimate ends.
  4. Man cannot, given original sin, reach this ultimate end without free will.
    Therefore, man has a free will.
I might note that although I have placed the argument in what some might consider to be religious terms, I think that they can be understood using notions that one can come to by the light of natural reason such that the argument could appeal to any rational agent.
 
preferanonymous said:
Why should one worry about the relation between free will and determinism if there is no determinism?

Consider an argument against determinism:
  1. Quantum Mechanics
**The notion here is that all scientific laws are probabilistic in nature, not causal. **Furthermore, this probabilistic nature of the laws is not due to a lack of knowledge on our part. The no hidden variable argument has shown this indeterminancy is, so to speak, inherent in the universe. Yet, if there is no causality in this way, there is no determinism. This is not to say, however, that there might not be a sort of causality that does exist albeit not in the realm of the scientific.

Free will. Here is an argument for it:
  1. Man has a tendency toward evil (original sin).
  2. Man has as his ultimate end however, God.
  3. It is possible for man to reach his ultimate ends.
  4. Man cannot, given original sin, reach this ultimate end without free will.
    Therefore, man has a free will.
I might note that although I have placed the argument in what some might consider to be religious terms, I think that they can be understood using notions that one can come to by the light of natural reason such that the argument could appeal to any rational agent.
Click to expand...
False statement.
Vector of force over delta time applied to an object in position A determines position B.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
I don’t believe in absolute metaphysical or physical determinism. The idea that physical events absolutely determines our choices destroys any meaningful sense of freewill and thus also the idea that a choice is being made since all your actions our merely the inevitable and direct result of previous non-rational causes. It seems to me that any attempt at making the two compatible will inevitably result in rendering the idea of freewill meaningless.*

Freewill = the idea that one is not forced to make any particular choice if and when a series of possibilities is presented. *
Click to expand...
Interesting subject, I look at this question in a slightly different way, so not sure if you’d be happy with me jumping on your thread. If not please let me know and I’ll head elsewhere. If you don’t mind thoughI’d be interested in your (and others) thoughts.

Firstly I think it’s worth making a note that I and probably most people suffer from a certain amount of bias on this issue. Because it is so closely linked to our sense of self. “I” to me is there person in here who is controlling “my” body. My image of what that person is would be substantially changed if I were to come to the understanding that free will isn’t as free as I’d like it to be.*

However, it’s also worth noting that just because I want my free will to be genuinely free, that doesn’t mean it necessarily IS that free.

Now, on to the question of determinism.

I think there is a significant difficulty with us possessing free will which applies whether the mind is something which is purely a function of the brain or is undertaken separately in a soul or something else. The problem is as follows:*

Determinism essentially means thatall events including human actions and choices are fully determined by preceding events and states of affairs, and so that freedom of choice is illusory. However, if this is not the caee and what we “will” is independent of current or preceding state of affairs (the internal working of the brain or soul) and every single thing we have ever experienced (preceding events) then in what way are we rational beings?

Essentially, as far as I can see, for our “will” to not be deterministic there must be some randomisation function built our “will” to enable our choices to be independent of any and all influencing factors.

So as far as I can tell there appears to be a dilemma, either

a). We are rational creatures - the “decisions” we make are outputs from interactions of billions of factors (current information, genetics, memories, the nature of your soul (if it exists) etc) but which are all ultimately deterministic - thus “free will” is not truly free.*

b). We are not rational creatures - the “decisions” we make can be entirely independent of all factors which could influence that decision - thus “free will” is actually a randomisation factor in our behaviour.

All of the above is (as far as I can see) independent of whether a soul exists. By which I mean that if it doesn’t exist then the “decision making process” (whether deterministic or not) must occur in the brain. If it does exist the the “decision making process” (whether deterministic or not) presumably occurs in the soul.

This is the first attempt I’ve made to write this out so please forgive me if it isn’t terribly well written.*

Thoughts?
 
Candide_West said:
Interesting subject, I look at this question in a slightly different way, so not sure if you’d be happy with me jumping on your thread. If not please let me know and I’ll head elsewhere. If you don’t mind thoughI’d be interested in your (and others) thoughts.

Firstly I think it’s worth making a note that I and probably most people suffer from a certain amount of bias on this issue. Because it is so closely linked to our sense of self. “I” to me is there person in here who is controlling “my” body. My image of what that person is would be substantially changed if I were to come to the understanding that free will isn’t as free as I’d like it to be.*

However, it’s also worth noting that just because I want my free will to be genuinely free, that doesn’t mean it necessarily IS that free.

Now, on to the question of determinism.

I think there is a significant difficulty with us possessing free will which applies whether the mind is something which is purely a function of the brain or is undertaken separately in a soul or something else. The problem is as follows:*

Determinism essentially means thatall events including human actions and choices are fully determined by preceding events and states of affairs, and so that freedom of choice is illusory. However, if this is not the caee and what we “will” is independent of current or preceding state of affairs (the internal working of the brain or soul) and every single thing we have ever experienced (preceding events) then in what way are we rational beings?

Essentially, as far as I can see, for our “will” to not be deterministic there must be some randomisation function built our “will” to enable our choices to be independent of any and all influencing factors.

So as far as I can tell there appears to be a dilemma, either

a). We are rational creatures - the “decisions” we make are outputs from interactions of billions of factors (current information, genetics, memories, the nature of your soul (if it exists) etc) but which are all ultimately deterministic - thus “free will” is not truly free.*

b). We are not rational creatures - the “decisions” we make can be entirely independent of all factors which could influence that decision - thus “free will” is actually a randomisation factor in our behaviour.

All of the above is (as far as I can see) independent of whether a soul exists. By which I mean that if it doesn’t exist then the “decision making process” (whether deterministic or not) must occur in the brain. If it does exist the the “decision making process” (whether deterministic or not) presumably occurs in the soul.

This is the first attempt I’ve made to write this out so please forgive me if it isn’t terribly well written.*

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Interesting! Thank you.

This is a general statement. Posts talk about free will and what influences it – which is proper. But I often wonder what exactly is a personal free will experience.
 
From a Catholic standpoint I feel that a particular aspect of the concept of “free will” has been overlooked. It would seem, that as creations of God, and participating in the creation of God as rational beings we have but two choices.
  1. Conform our wills with that of our Creator.
  2. Chose not to conform our wills to that of the Creator.
It would seem that this would be more in line with the Catholic notion of free will, to choose God or not to choose God, to choose love or not to choose love. This is a radical self giving of ones self to the other rather than just thinking as free will as doing what one chooses to do on a moment to moment or day to day basis.
 
DCNBILL said:
From a Catholic standpoint I feel that a particular aspect of the concept of “free will” has been overlooked. It would seem, that as creations of God, and participating in the creation of God as rational beings we have but two choices.
  1. Conform our wills with that of our Creator.
  2. Chose not to conform our wills to that of the Creator.
It would seem that this would be more in line with the Catholic notion of free will, to choose God or not to choose God, to choose love or not to choose love. This is a radical self giving of ones self to the other rather than just thinking as free will as doing what one chooses to do on a moment to moment or day to day basis.
Click to expand...
Catholics also believe that the soul’s will is directed toward the ultimate good which is God. In practical human life, often a lesser or substitute good is willed.
 
Jaaanosik said:
False statement.
Vector of force over delta time applied to an object in position A determines position B.
Click to expand...
Consider the Bell Inequality: Quantum mechanices contains law governed statistical correlations that bear no causal relation whatever to any earlier correlation. Not only are the later events not determinate effects of the earlier ones, they are not even probabilistic effects of the early ones.

I do not think it is false. Science gives us correlations and these are insufficient to determine causality. If we want causality and objectivity, we need to look elsewhere than modern science.
 
preferanonymous said:
Consider the Bell Inequality: Quantum mechanices contains law governed statistical correlations that bear no causal relation whatever to any earlier correlation. Not only are the later events not determinate effects of the earlier ones, they are not even probabilistic effects of the early ones.

I do not think it is false. Science gives us correlations and these are insufficient to determine causality. If we want causality and objectivity, we need to look elsewhere than modern science.
Click to expand...
Well, you said ‘all scientific laws’ and I don’t think it’s true. For ‘small - quantum’ world I agree but there are scientific laws for ‘big’ that are certain/deterministic otherwise we would not be able to build anything (bridges, cars, …).
 
DCNBILL said:
From a Catholic standpoint I feel that a particular aspect of the concept of “free will” has been overlooked. It would seem, that as creations of God, and participating in the creation of God as rational beings we have but two choices.
  1. Conform our wills with that of our Creator.
  2. Chose not to conform our wills to that of the Creator.
It would seem that this would be more in line with the Catholic notion of free will, to choose God or not to choose God, to choose love or not to choose love. This is a radical self giving of ones self to the other rather than just thinking as free will as doing what one chooses to do on a moment to moment or day to day basis.
Click to expand...
Good words, DCNBILL. Free will makes it possible for a person to either accept God or to reject Him, and only when a person has made the determined choice to accept and follow the will of God can a person truly realize and understand the liberating power of His love.
 
shoe said:
Good words, DCNBILL. Free will makes it possible for a person to either accept God or to reject Him, and only when a person has made the determined choice to accept and follow the will of God can a person truly realize and understand the liberating power of His love.
Click to expand...
Okay, but how do you get to that knowledge from a philosophical point of view.

Oh snap…you didn’t realise you was in the philosophy forum did you.
 
grannymh said:
Interesting! Thank you.

This is a general statement. Posts talk about free will and what influences it – which is proper. But I often wonder what exactly is a personal free will experience.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

I guess my point is that the question of whether we are free willed or deterministic beings is actually independent of whether or not we have a soul. But closely linked to whether or not we are rational creatures.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Okay, but how do you get to that knowledge from a philosophical point of view.

Oh snap…you didn’t realise you was in the philosophy forum did you.
Click to expand...
The following is merely an outline of the philosophical reasoning that leads to my conclusion. Some reasonable steps have been omitted due to lack of time and laziness.
  1. We are rational creatures, we did not create ourselves.
  2. If we did not create ourselves then there must be a creator.
  3. If there is a creator there must be a purpose for creation.
  4. If there is a purpose for creation then there must be a way for the rational creature to understand this purpose.
  5. A creator of rational creatures would have a way of communicating the purpose of creation to those creatures.
Jesus the Christ ends up being this communication resulting in the whole concept of conforming ones will with that of God (from scripture).
 
shoe said:
Good words, DCNBILL. Free will makes it possible for a person to either accept God or to reject Him, and only when a person has made the determined choice to accept and follow the will of God can a person truly realize and understand the liberating power of His love.
Click to expand...
Amen, there is no comparison to the freedom that one feels when one does not have to worry about tomorrow knowing God is already there. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top