jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (20 posts)

The Odd Couple- Free Will and Destiny

  1. A.Villarasa profile image78
    A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago

    Humans have always thought of themselves blessed because,  from  their  perspective, they  among all the other sentient entities on earth are the only ones to have "free will" by virtue of their  cerebral capacity, temerity, and perspicacity to potentially escape the clutches of the laws of cause and effect, thus allowing them to ACT WITHOUT MATERIAL REASON.

    Most would argue that  humans, having "free will",  would allow  them to act differently under identical or similar circumstances.  Scientists  argue that all particles (man, including his brain, are made up  of atomic and sub-atomic particles, ) in the universe follow set trajectory, thus man could never be the "captain of his own ship" , i.e. destiny because his physio-chemical and biological components have pre-determined the course of action  they migh take  given  similar or identical settings.

    Several modalities in physics including the  Uncertainty Principle. have been proposed as undergirding the potential  reality or unreality of free will. Whether or not free will be found one way or the other, neuroscience and psycology are beginning to explain why humans feel that they can influence their destiny.

    1. kess profile image60
      kessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      My destiny is set in absolute freedom
      My will is bound by absolute freedom

      Therefore my will and destiny is one.

      So I live knowing my destiny is set
      And all my actions predetermined
      Each revealed in its own time.

      Therefore I am never at odds with myself, my destiny nor my will.

      1. A.Villarasa profile image78
        A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I disagree with your notion that Free will and destiny are one and the same thing, although I must admit that ther are obvious  connections and integrations, however  linear between the two. The distance from point A ( the free willing  initiation of action) ) to point B ( arriving at the destination)  may differ , the from mind to mind,  from action to action and from destination to destination, thus the variability of cause(free will ) and effect(destiny)
        Humans instinctively and intuitively assumes that they have "free will" because it is entertwined with the concept of individual responsibility, and societal imposition of reward and punishment of actions emanating from the exercise of  'free will.

        Science may come up with the methodology that systematically or empirically deny the existence of free will, but that's not something that I am looking forward to.

        1. kess profile image60
          kessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The common thought of freewill and predestination as a two way street, is either one or the other is not entirely true.

          It will  be true only when the way itself presents limitations and it seen as do this and do not do that..

          The destination itself will also present it self as a limitation because it is incorporated with this but not that.

          So within such scenario you will be absolute correct as being one or the other, never both.

          But...when both the way and the destination  are one and the same, it incorporates the two into One, inseparable both working toward the same goal.

          This is perfection

    2. Chris Neal profile image83
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not entirely sure I understand you properly, but if I do I think that the analysis overrelies on the mechanical model of life. Man has a self-determinitive capacity when it comes to moral and ethical choices, but not when it comes to the inevitability of aging and death.

      1. A.Villarasa profile image78
        A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        As with taxes, the inevitability of aging and dying is a given. What is  not pre-determined is the variability of man's perceptual abilities as it relates not only to what are immediately inferred by his 5
        senses, but also to what are physically/materially
        reachable via his ability to imagine and formulate concepts

        1. ptosis profile image80
          ptosisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Don't forget the 6th sense, ESP or PSI, like spooky action at a distance for some reason my mother knows from thousands of miles away when I'm stressed out and she calls me.

          Or that uneasy can't pin it down feeling about a person that you just met and find out later in the newspapers what a sicko he is. (Happened 3, all were kidnappers)

          #1 Very old man the next day or so, recognized on  "America's Most Wanted", called it in, was told we weren't the only ones calling in the same area.

          #2 A young punk, local

          #3 middle aged man, in the papers after 2 year investigation, printed his very long bad history that included kidnapping.

          Most people I meet - I am neutral, but when I instantly hate or feel uneasy for absolutely no specific reason whatsoever - I trust my gut. Cops have to have an articulable reason for suspicion - I don't.

          I guess women need to trust their gut because not a good enough fighter and it's so hard to run in those stupid high heels...... Met a guy coming on to me - VERY CREEPY. A friend said, "watch out", I said I'm already am. Later, look up on sex offender url - this guy was a 3 time rapist, each time multiple, (meaning he didn't do it alone) and all on his ex-wife. Jeesh.


          http://s4.hubimg.com/u/6784595_f248.jpg

          1. A.Villarasa profile image78
            A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I have always wondered if  thought  i.e.,  mind action and reaction travel the same way as light, either as a particle or as a wave. ESP could be explained (pure conjecture on my part) by thought traveling the speed of light, so that at the instant that one is thinking about something, the recipient or the subject of the thought  immediately sense, thus becomes aware of the thought, then respond accordingly. Or is it pure electro-magnetism, the human brain's  functioning basically  being  subsumed through electrical  activity of the axo-dendritic synapses.

          2. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I read a book several years ago, I wish like crazy I could remember the title and the author because it was really good. This guy was security officer and he had learned to trust his gut instincts and was almost always right.

            1. A.Villarasa profile image78
              A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              On a larger scale, I have always felt that Homo Sapiens,  being  the most intuitive and instinctive among the  millions of  living entities that have ever populated earth over the millenia, has  the  obvious advantage of overcoming the natural cycle of extinction on earth.

              On a smaller scale, individual humans whose intuition and instincts are more developed, and attuned to his environment, have a better chance of surviving than his fellow but  less intuitive and instinctive humans

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I don't know if I agree that humans, as a species, are more intuitive than other species. But I agree that those humans who are more in tune with their guts (sometimes this is called "street smarts") have an overall better chance of survival.

              2. profile image0
                jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Human survival Depends on the cause of extinction and not on the ability of any individual humans.

                1. A.Villarasa profile image78
                  A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I am referring of course to individual survival skills while  doing activities of daily living.  From the evolutionary point of view,  the survival of Homo Sapiens as a specie, short of a cataclysmic natural disaster (as what happened  that led to the extinction of dinossaurs), will all depend on how humans manage to overcome  the licentious cajoling of his EGO. Self- destruction is always around the corner when humans become  overly
                  egocentric. E=mc2 is a very elegant equation but when applied egocentrically  can only mean one thing---- man's  apocalyptic  demise.

                2. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  If I understand evolutionary theory correctly, the ability and actions of many individual humans can affect extinction.

                  1. A.Villarasa profile image78
                    A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Collective actions lead to collective reactions.  However, the speed with which man's  collective activities impact   the natural world has, in recent years, stunned the collective reactivities of that world, that it may not have enough time to  adjust and recover... thus the degradation of nature to the point of no return.

    3. calynbana profile image85
      calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I do not believe in free will. It is a concept that is impossible for people, it would mean that we could behave in a manner entirely against our character, upbringing and nature if we wanted to. We don't, we can be conditioned, we can be brainwashed, and we can be influenced. We act out of free choice not free will. We choose our actions based off of prior inclinations and the way our brain is wired. We must also choose our actions based off of the external environment which we can manipulate, but it can manipulate us as well. These are all signs of free choice not free will.

      1. A.Villarasa profile image78
        A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Choice is not free at all if there are no alternatives to what is being offered as "choice".  Thus if there is only one option, deciding to accept or reject the option is at its most basic and simplest,  exercising  "free will".

        Despite what scientists are arguing, the only true model for "free will" is the variability of  possibilities, and to an extent probabilities.

  2. ptosis profile image80
    ptosisposted 4 years ago

    I believe in free will - I must.


    http://s4.hubimg.com/u/6763267_f248.jpg

    1. A.Villarasa profile image78
      A.Villarasaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      As I do. your schematic diagram is unreadable, thus not very helpful in our discussion.

 
working