Is there any free will?

[oldcelt]

Again no. If you were told the world was made of pudding and you saw with your own eyes this is not true, you would not accept that.

Let me put it to you this way. Fast and simple.

Can’t remember the person who said this but here it I.

The Truth is the truth rather or not anyone chooses to believe it or not.
And a Lie is still a lie even if everyone chooses to believe it.

Someone can say there is No God, they have free will to reject his teachings, even his existence.

But even if they use free will to reject him and his teachings do not make his truth any more true or false.

Truth is truth. God exists, even if people refuse to accept it.

You can tell me all you want that the only reason I believe is because I was taught that. But you will be proved unfortunately by thousands who were also taught that, but as they got older refused to believe it wrong.

Someone who is taught and keeps the faith is using the grace given to them by God to continue their life journey with him.

Someone who was taught, baptized in the faith and refuses to continue their life journey with him, and choose to reject his existence and teachings refuse the grace given to them and follow themselves. That is free will.

All said through faith, which I respect greatly, so long as it does not claim to become FACT. Before anything can become a truth, it must be underpinned with either faith or fact. If this is not the case then anyone can set themselves up as master and judge.
If underpinned by faith, then that truth is valid only for those who share that faith. If by fact, it is applicable to all…whether they like it or not.

Here, all our beliefs are underpinned by faith since we are speaking of the creator.

 

[oldcelt]

Not true. At some point I come to realize that the Earth is not made of vanilla pudding, just as we learn that there is no Santa Claus and there is no Easter Bunny. You are making the false assumption that there is no intellectual basis to Faith. That is incorrect, although it may be true for some. You should know better than to make a gross generalization like that.

Same conclusion to your last statment. Your prejudices are no shared by all. We do not surrender our will blindly, at least no intelligent person does. Faith has its reasons and they are good ones.

Linus2nd

At least now you are using the word faith, instead of fact. That has made this a successful exchange of thoughts. I have no prejudice against faith, since I have my own. You are also correct that I did not choose my faith blindly. It was after great study and searching. I, like others of faith, must admit that I have no facts that back my belief in my God.

 

[Aloysium]

At least now you are using the word faith, instead of fact. . . .

If a fact is “a thing that is indisputably the case”, can there be any objective facts? I don’t know, but facts may be very rare phenomena. It seems that my “facts” are what others call faith.

 

[Bahman]

If a fact is “a thing that is indisputably the case”, can there be any objective facts? I don’t know, but facts may be very rare phenomena. It seems that my “facts” are what others call faith.

What if fact X goes against faith Y or in your language faith X goes against faith Y?

 

[SecretCatholic]

I think the best first step is to define what “free” and “will” are separately and what the term “free will” means.

 

[Bahman]

I think the best first step is to define what “free” and “will” are separately and what the term “free will” means.

We need tendency to perform action subjected to some constraints. The tendency is the “will” and constraint is the result of experience/learning. The freedom means that we are not completely subjected to constraints. How? We will never know since that is price we have to pay to be free. In another word, the knowledge of how we are free put a strong constraint on our will hence our action cannot be free. Does this make sense?

 

[GaryTaylor]

We need tendency to perform action subjected to some constraints. The tendency is the “will” and constraint is the result of experience/learning. The freedom means that we are not completely subjected to constraints. How? We will never know since that is price we have to pay to be free. In another word, the knowledge of how we are free put a strong constraint on our will hence our action cannot be free. Does this make sense?

We are like sheep walking through a known, following bread crumbs, which to us by large is unknown, just like the infinites of math or science. Consider for example Tesla or better yet Franklin with the kite, key, electricity. From a known of a single equation on the board, we extend to the infinite and interconnected. Choice through known, leads to understanding unknown. Advancement can make jumps and bounds how? Chance?

 

[Bahman]

We are like sheep walking through a known, following bread crumbs, which to us by large is unknown, just like the infinites of math or science. Consider for example Tesla or better yet Franklin with the kite, key, electricity. From a known of a single equation on the board, we extend to the infinite and interconnected. Choice through known, leads to understanding unknown. Advancement can make jumps and bounds how? Chance?

Very good questions.

There are basically three main steps in acquiring knowledge, first, observing related events/assuming related axioms , second, questioning the relation between events/axioms in another word “why” and third, finding the answer to a questions in another word “how”.

How this is done in our minds? First, any event is translated to a mind state, second, the coincidence between two (or more) events one always following another is translated to a link meaning two mind states related to two events and the link between them is again is similar to an event translated as another mind state containing the information about the fact that two first events are correlated. We acquire knowledge when the link is established. This is “why”, in another word second event happen because the first one.

What is the force behind mind changes?, moving toward the void!

Does this make sense? Feel free to ask questions.

 

[GaryTaylor]

What is the force behind mind changes?, Hmm, these moments or enlightenment, or moments of perfection, for example Einstein clicks seeking to solve M and comes to E=MC2. Its very logical the knowledge is transmitted in reverse by revelation, I can’t think of a reason why it couldn’t be. If we are within the universe and the first principle is transmitting the energy, then we are within the schematic receiving both ways from within and without.

 

[Bahman]

What is the force behind mind changes?, Hmm, these moments or enlightenment, or moments of perfection, for example Einstein clicks seeking to solve M and comes to E=MC2. Its very logical the knowledge is transmitted in reverse by revelation, I can’t think of a reason why it couldn’t be. If we are within the universe and the first principle is transmitting the energy, then we are within the schematic receiving both ways from within and without.

Could you please elaborate?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Could you please elaborate?

We are reverse-engineering the universe and step by step understanding how the process of creation occurred and within the admitted known of the time continuum so inside outside of time. However the energy was transmitted opposite and from outside of time. There’s no reason the knowledge doesn’t proceed both ways.

 

[Bahman]

We are reverse-engineering the universe and step by step understanding how the process of creation occurred and within the admitted known of the time continuum so inside outside of time. However the energy was transmitted opposite and from outside of time. There’s no reason the knowledge doesn’t proceed both ways.

We are indeed reverse-engineering the creation, if our universe is the only one, the creation start from very simple, namely void, to complex, namely what we are now, and we are in the bottom, namely at the edge of complexity.