What is free will?

[Bahman]

Free will is the self caused ability of intellect gained from life experiences, so called knowledge gathering, to deal with a new situation caused by an external stimulus.

1. To open up we need to first explain what self cause. By self cause we meant that the root of decision is caused by the intellect so it could act based on no external stimulus. It has to be self caused because it could confer with anything including reasoning when it is necessary and that is the meaning of freedom. As an example, you are studding for an exam and you know by reasoning that it is good thing to do, but you suddenly decide to go out for a walk. Why? Because you wish so.
2. It is the result of experiences yet it doesn’t have any form, in another word it is uniform, since otherwise it would be biased toward one or another experience. The self-caused quality is the result of uniformity since otherwise it could not break the causality chain, would be biased with what it receive as stimulus. As an example, you are thinking of making tea, you go to kitchen but suddenly you recall that you don’t have any tea so you won’t do everything an finally realize that you have no tea. You of course knew that you didn’t have tea since the last time you checked it, but how the knowledge of not having tea suddenly pops up? That is how free will can break the chain of causality otherwise you would find that you don’t have tea at the very end.
3. It does depends on situation or external stimulus as a necessary condition but not sufficient meaning that it could act self-caused. As an example, you feel thirsty so you go to take some water that means that stimulus was necessary for action but you could resist the action hence you are free.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Free Will is that thing God gave you but forbids you to use.

 

[davidv]

Free Will is that thing God gave you but forbids you to use.

When Did God forbid you to use your free will?

He forbade you from choosing that which is bad for you.

1704 The human person participates in the light and power of the divine Spirit. By his reason, he is capable of understanding the order of things established by the Creator. By free will, he is capable of directing himself toward his true good. He finds his perfection "in seeking and loving what is true and good."7

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Free will is the self caused ability of intellect gained from life experiences, so called knowledge gathering, to deal with a new situation caused by an external stimulus.

1. To open up we need to first explain what self cause. By self cause we meant that the root of decision is caused by the intellect so it could act based on no external stimulus. It has to be self caused because it could confer with anything including reasoning when it is necessary and that is the meaning of freedom. As an example, you are studding for an exam and you know by reasoning that it is good thing to do, but you suddenly decide to go out for a walk. Why? Because you wish so.
2. It is the result of experiences yet it doesn’t have any form, in another word it is uniform, since otherwise it would be biased toward one or another experience. The self-caused quality is the result of uniformity since otherwise it could not break the causality chain, would be biased with what it receive as stimulus. As an example, you are thinking of making tea, you go to kitchen but suddenly you recall that you don’t have any tea so you won’t do everything an finally realize that you have no tea. You of course knew that you didn’t have tea since the last time you checked it, but how the knowledge of not having tea suddenly pops up? That is how free will can break the chain of causality otherwise you would find that you don’t have tea at the very end.
3. It does depends on situation or external stimulus as a necessary condition but not sufficient meaning that it could act self-caused. As an example, you feel thirsty so you go to take some water that means that stimulus was necessary for action but you could resist the action hence you are free.

Bahman, your mode of expression is so convoluted as to be scaracely capable of comprehension.

Free will is simply a judgment, a free judgment not forced upon us, to do one thing rather than another. You don’t need to bring in all the other bagage about the intellect because it is obvious to everyone that we cannot make a choice if we don’t have any knowledge. Dumb animals do not freely choose to do anything because they have no knowledge upon which they reflect, because they have no intellect by which to gain knowledge for reflection.

Linus2nd

 

[CHCL]

Free will is the self caused ability of intellect gained from life experiences, so called knowledge gathering, to deal with a new situation caused by an external stimulus.

1. To open up we need to first explain what self cause. By self cause we meant that the root of decision is caused by the intellect so it could act based on no external stimulus. It has to be self caused because it could confer with anything including reasoning when it is necessary and that is the meaning of freedom. As an example, you are studding for an exam and you know by reasoning that it is good thing to do, but you suddenly decide to go out for a walk. Why? Because you wish so.
2. It is the result of experiences yet it doesn’t have any form, in another word it is uniform, since otherwise it would be biased toward one or another experience. The self-caused quality is the result of uniformity since otherwise it could not break the causality chain, would be biased with what it receive as stimulus. As an example, you are thinking of making tea, you go to kitchen but suddenly you recall that you don’t have any tea so you won’t do everything an finally realize that you have no tea. You of course knew that you didn’t have tea since the last time you checked it, but how the knowledge of not having tea suddenly pops up? That is how free will can break the chain of causality otherwise you would find that you don’t have tea at the very end.
3. It does depends on situation or external stimulus as a necessary condition but not sufficient meaning that it could act self-caused. As an example, you feel thirsty so you go to take some water that means that stimulus was necessary for action but you could resist the action hence you are free.

What are you even trying to say? BRB taking two hours off to work out this problem.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

When Did God forbid you to use your free will?

He forbade you from choosing that which is bad for you.

“Free Will” implies that I can do *anything *I want. But there are consequences (i.e., going to Hell) for some things.

Suppose an abusive husband were to tell his wife “Have sex with me right now or I will kill you” (and he means it). She may have the “Free Will” to tell him No but if she does, she’ll wind up dead.

Does she really have a “choice”?

 

[GEddie]

Free Will is that thing God gave you but forbids you to use.

Isn’t it a film about a whale???

 

[anixx]

Free will is the self caused ability of intellect gained from life experiences, so called knowledge gathering, to deal with a new situation caused by an external stimulus.

1. To open up we need to first explain what self cause. By self cause we meant that the root of decision is caused by the intellect so it could act based on no external stimulus. It has to be self caused because it could confer with anything including reasoning when it is necessary and that is the meaning of freedom. As an example, you are studding for an exam and you know by reasoning that it is good thing to do, but you suddenly decide to go out for a walk. Why? Because you wish so.
2. It is the result of experiences yet it doesn’t have any form, in another word it is uniform, since otherwise it would be biased toward one or another experience. The self-caused quality is the result of uniformity since otherwise it could not break the causality chain, would be biased with what it receive as stimulus. As an example, you are thinking of making tea, you go to kitchen but suddenly you recall that you don’t have any tea so you won’t do everything an finally realize that you have no tea. You of course knew that you didn’t have tea since the last time you checked it, but how the knowledge of not having tea suddenly pops up? That is how free will can break the chain of causality otherwise you would find that you don’t have tea at the very end.
3. It does depends on situation or external stimulus as a necessary condition but not sufficient meaning that it could act self-caused. As an example, you feel thirsty so you go to take some water that means that stimulus was necessary for action but you could resist the action hence you are free.

Let me try to make something out of this…

1. Free will can influence the chain of causality, just because it can.
2. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because sometimes our intellect has a habit of playing tricks on us.
3. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because it can ignore external stimuli.

Is this in anyway correct?

 

[davidv]

“Free Will” implies that I can do *anything *I want. But there are consequences (i.e., going to Hell) for some things.

You imply it, but that is not what the Church means. Argue against what the Church teaches else you are using false logic, equivocation.

Suppose an abusive husband were to tell his wife “Have sex with me right now or I will kill you” (and he means it). She may have the “Free Will” to tell him No but if she does, she’ll wind up dead.

Does she really have a “choice”?

Yes she still has choices (free will). She can weigh the consequence and decide accordingly.

God however doesn’t ask you to do evil as you protagonist in your story does. It is not a relevant analogy.

 

[Bahman]

Bahman, your mode of expression is so convoluted as to be scaracely capable of comprehension.

Free will is simply a judgment, a free judgment not forced upon us, to do one thing rather than another. You don’t need to bring in all the other bagage about the intellect because it is obvious to everyone that we cannot make a choice if we don’t have any knowledge. Dumb animals do not freely choose to do anything because they have no knowledge upon which they reflect, because they have no intellect by which to gain knowledge for reflection.

Linus2nd

I will try to write easier and thank you for your advice.

Judgment is another ability of intellect which differ from free will. Suppose you are in a new situation which requires a decision. Suddenly your intellect is loaded out with reasoning, life experiences, etc. Where do they come from? That is self-cause ability of free will. Your focus of your intellect also changes when the judgment on any subject matter is finished, meaning that your intellect either follows a chain of reasoning or it is again influenced by free will.

Basically I am trying to point out that free will is a self cause uniform ability of intellect. Our freedom comes from its uniformity and self cause outcome is the will.

 

[Bahman]

Let me try to make something out of this…

1. Free will can influence the chain of causality, just because it can.
2. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because sometimes our intellect has a habit of playing tricks on us.
3. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because it can ignore external stimuli.

Is this in anyway correct?

1. Free will can influence the chain of causality, just because it can.
2. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because sometimes our habits has the ability to trick our intellect.
3. Free will can influence the chain of causality, because it can influence intellect to ignore external stimuli.

Now it is very close. The only property I fail to provide a good example is uniformity which claims that all pieces of knowledge are equivalent when it comes to a new situation otherwise we were biased with one experience more than another falling in trap of causality chain hence we wouldn’t be free.

 

[phil_at_dayboro]

Isn’t it a film about a whale???

You have a subtle sense of humour, that some of the simple folk just don’t see ,

 

[empther]

Suppose you are in a new situation which requires a decision. Suddenly your intellect is loaded out with reasoning, life experiences, etc. Where do they come from? That is **self-cause ability :bigyikes::hey_bud:**of free will.

So now we have something that creates itself?

Animals have appetites, but no free will. They must “want” that which they sense as good for themselves. Every buffalo in a herd of millions will behave exactly like every other buffalo in the herd.

Humans can will things that are not good for themselves.
Human will transcends the black or white considerations of choices. A man may be a saint while his identical twin brother is a serial killer.

The human intellect is capable of understanding any concept presented to it This intellect cannot be caused by natural evolution which only develops what the animal needs and ignores ( or never develops ) anything else. :extrahappy:

So does the will lead the intellect, or does the intellect lead the will?
As Aquinas points out they lead each other.
It’s a package deal. Both “universally adaptable” intellect and “universally knowing” will are needed to let us claim being human. Neither of these things can be natural or self-caused. They are created by God.

 

[Bahman]

So now we have something that creates itself?

Yes and that necessary otherwise we cannot break the chain of causality functioning like a machine.

Animals have appetites, but no free will. They must “want” that which they sense as good for themselves. Every buffalo in a herd of millions will behave exactly like every other buffalo in the herd.

Do animal have will? One cannot do anything without that. Haven’t you seen that animal lead and follow? One cannot expect that if they are same.

Humans can will things that are not good for themselves.
Human will transcends the black or white considerations of choices. A man may be a saint while his identical twin brother is a serial killer.

Do you mean that animal have no intellect? Any being has an intellect. That is the difference in body which make us different.

The human intellect is capable of understanding any concept presented to it This intellect cannot be caused by natural evolution which only develops what the animal needs and ignores ( or never develops ) anything else. :extrahappy:

Of course you cannot have something out of a being if it is not potential for a being to be but that doesn’t prove anything.

So does the will lead the intellect, or does the intellect lead the will?

Intellect does listen to will when it is necessary almost always but it can forfeit to do so, so called meditation.

As Aquinas points out they lead each other.

I don’t think so, how could you meditate then?

It’s a package deal. Both “universally adaptable” intellect and “universally knowing” will are needed to let us claim being human.

That I agree. I don’t know what do you mean with universal.

Neither of these things can be natural or self-caused. They are created by God.

The will does as you accumulate knowledge so it is our duty.

The intellect also is the result accumulation of beings. Can you tell me where does God intervene in this video?

And I think you misread what self-cause is.

I like my God more than yours because it doesn’t need to intervene in any little thing.

 

[empther]

From post 14… :takethat:

Originally Posted by empther
So now we have something that creates itself?

Yes and that necessary otherwise we cannot break the chain of causality functioning like a machine.

I can’t believe it! :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :hypno:

You still say the will creates itself?

The rest of your post is similarly wrong, wrong, wrong,
and not worth the time to comment on it. :coffeeread:

 

[Cromwell4]

Simple. Free Will =Capability to do Evil

(animals do not have this)

 

[seagal]

Wasn’t this already covered (exhaustively) in your other thread?

 

[thirdn6]

Free will is when you know you succeeded in imposing your will against your mother in law!