Free-Will vs. Human Instincts

1. 58

   squeeknomoreposted 9 years ago

   Some folks say Free will is a necessary illusion. Many say we are ruled by intstincts.
   Do we have free wills to guide...
   or does nature guide us?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      if free will exists, is it an illusion? how would instincts play a role in my decision to watch the walking dead or be a packers fan? i have the free will to make that choice. if everything were just instincts, what would make murder or rape wrong? would a person just be guided by their instincts? it would actually seem more wrong to hold them accountable for a choice they couldn't freely make?

      replyreport
      1. 58

         squeeknomoreposted 9 years agoin reply to this

         I say we have free will to guide. Many will argue. Many who are atheists will argue, that is… why do you suppose that is?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            i dont know. i dont understand why some atheist fight so hard against certain issues.i dont see the free will argument as much of an argument for either side really. there have been other that escape my mind now. sometimes it seems as if a christian or other religion believes it, then the atheist will automatically reject it.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               squeeknomoreposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               I am hearing you. I am hearing you. Any thing else?

               replyreport
               1. 58

                  squeeknomoreposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                  Rad Man profile image82Rad Manposted 6 days ago:
                  
                  "Free will is an evolutionary necessary illusion.
                  
                  Humans are not the only species that consciously makes decisions so therefore it's a product of evolution that makes us think we have free will.
                  
                  It's necessary for our survival that we think our choices are real.
                  
                  Choices are a product of brain chemistry and are predictable and therefore an illusion."

                  replyreport
            2. 0

               Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               It's rather simple really. Christians frequently talk about how God gave us free will without understanding the concept themselves. One can come to an understanding of the concept if one studies the concept without being hindered by ones religious teaching. Religious teachings force you assume we have free will. Physics tells us that time may be an illusion for us as well as there is no reason why we should be able to forwards and backward and the future, past and present are all happening at the same time. This means the future is already determined and playing out. Making free will a necessary illusion.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                  who or what is the future determined by? What does time have to do with it? are you saying our actions are predetermined my time? How could time itself guide us , especially if its an illusion. Can you provide sources for time is an illusion?  Everything I've read says time is real.  please dont take all my questions as me just trying to be a douche or to just try and prove you wrong. i sometimes ask to a fault, but these are genuine questions i would like answers to. if you know or can point me to resources, it will be appreciated.There are christians who make the "you just gotta have faith" statement. needless to say these kind of Christians make me cringe every time they say it. however there are also christians who do know physics and other area's of science that are not hindered by their religion. just because i believe in a designer doesn't mean i dont know or cant learn this stuff. my belief in God doesn't come from what i don't know, but what i do know about the world. i could also make a similar argument against atheists for backing away any time the evidence leads to anything non material. they are hindered by their lack of belief. i for one dont believe that about most atheists. but it is a similar, hateful , and useless argument.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     Sure you can start here. You may also want to read up on Einstein and his theories.
                     
                     http://youtu.be/NJM4g9emAeI

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                        thank you. any recommended books or resources on Einsteins theories?

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                           Wikipedia is a good start. Did the video help?

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                              so many distractions. i haven't finished it. but yeah im into it. thank you.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                 i finished that video. thank you for that, it was very informative and gave a better idea as what what people are talking about when they speak of time. i will probably get ripped apart by everyone for this, but based on what the video talked about i am gonna have to disagree with Einstein. obviously im not on his level of intelligence, but the demonstrations and evidence provided in the video for time being an illusion just wasn't convincing  to me at all. the demonstration they did in 1971 with the syncing of two watches (or clocks i forget) and a person on the plane has a watch that end up being millionths of a second slower seemed weak. couldn't just be the watch? also the example the gave of a person in motion walking towards you seems slowing in the observers mind. that may be the case, but it doesn't make it actually slower. it still takes the same 10 seconds or however long it would take if you're not looking. i cant really see time as anything other than a measuring tool. sure its real, because we obviously get older and everything decays and entropy's over time. but saying its an illusion and can be manipulated is to me is like saying yards are an illusion. a yard itself is real, but cant be manipulated. its just a way of measuring and communication something. isn't time the same kind of thing? even the mathematical equation example they used i thought was weak. because it can be calculated backwards it mean we can travel back in time? isnt that just the nature of math? If you want to check your answer even in simple math, don't you just work backwards? obviously i could be wrong about all this because im no where near Einstein, but at the moment i cant see it his way and have to disagree.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                    That's fine, but you will also have to throw all of his math out the window as well. Because he has back up everything with math. He arrived at his theories using math. He have been proven correct in every instance since.
                                    
                                    The reason given for time being an illusion or at least free will being an illusion is that the math shows us that our "nows" change depending on our speed and direction. So someone in the other side of the universe moving towards us will see our future and their "now". Meaning the future, past and present is all happening at the same time.
                                    
                                    Don't let your personal beliefs get in the way of knowledge and understanding of the universe. If you have to keep the separate then do so.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                       i get what you're saying. and i thought the video explained that point very well with the example of the alien coming towards or going away from earth. maybe that is something that could be proven with the math, but the demonstration still didn't seem too convincing to me of time itself being slowed down. there is no way to prove without time travel really the someone see their now and my future at the same time. how could they see my future until they get there as in the alien demonstration. i understand at his angle of now, he technically is facing my future, but he still has to arrive at the point to see it. it seems to me that the time isn't really determined already or is able to be manipulated, but that we need to get there. i don't know if im making sense really, but that's sort of how its playing out in my mind. im also not connecting free will and time. what does one have to do with the other? like i said though, im not on the level of Einstein and most likely could never comprehend his math equations that prove this. I have a hard time accepting something until its convincing to me though. i don't really think my beliefs are getting in the way. even if I did accept all this, i don't see how  God still couldn't be involved in it.

                                       report
                                       1. 0

                                          Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                          The speed at which one travels has in fact been proven several times as demonstrated on the video. There is certainly much of it that is hard to comprehend, such as gravity bending light and how speed affects the passage of time, but these things are proven.

                                          report
                                          1. 0

                                             christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                             ok. im probably missing something. thank you for the information. it does give me a lot to go on actually. i just need to do some more research and get deeper into it. i never guessed i would be so fascinated by time, lol.

                                             report
                                 2. 55

                                    EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                    Not a big deal, time dilation and length contraction are not easy concepts to wrap one's mind around the first while, they are counter-intuitive to our normal way of thinking, mostly because their significant effects are more observed at nearer to light speeds.
                                    
                                    But, time does indeed dilate with high velocities when compared with something that is stationary. The same goes for gravity, it also affects time. The higher the gravity, the slower time goes for the person in the gravity well compared with another further away.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                       yep. the video i watched said all that. i understand the concept of it. like i said though, the demonstrations were not convincing really. i will continue research on it though, because although the video was informative and most likely gave me the basics, im sure there is a lot more to it.

                                       report
                  2. 55

                     EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     Like yourself, I'm curious to find out about things, such as, what in this world that we know could possibly lead one to believe in a designer? As well, what are the "non-material" you refer?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                        http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/th … -argument/
                        
                        http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/th … -the-past/
                        
                        these can explain it a lot better than im really willing to write. pretty much everything we know about physics and the laws of nature and the way the world works is what leads me to a designer. in my opinion the world just has obvious design. even minor changes could cause life to end. its hard to imagine finding anything else that has such detail and structure and it somehow just got there by a process of random chance or evolving particles. for instance, if you find a dollar in your wallet. after observing the dollar and examining it in all its detail, whats the best explanation for it getting there? i think the way the world works is much more complicated and detailed than the dollar.

                        replyreport
                        1. 55

                           EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                           And yet, the laws of physics, nature and everything we know show there is no designer. How you managed to glean that is puzzling indeed considering the facts and evidence.
                           
                           
                           
                           That is no reason at all for a designer, that is a fallacy. There is nothing obvious that world has been designed, quite the contrary in fact.
                           
                           
                           
                           That's just an argument from ignorance.
                           
                           
                           
                           That is another fallacy. A dollar bill has nothing to do with anything about nature.
                           
                           From the link you provided:
                           
                           
                           
                           That is just nonsense. It jumps to the conclusion of a God simply due to a cause. Ridiculous doesn't even describe it.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                              this is getting a bit tiring having to repeat this on the forums lately. could you please explain, give examples, or tell me how im ignorant or how my statements are fallacious rather than just stating that? just saying "that's a fallacy" or "that's ignorant" is not an argument that proves or disproves anything. i agree that version of the kalam cosmological argument isnt a good representation. William Lane Craig is a good person to look up if you're really interested in learning about it.  I can assure you, it goes beyond that.

                              replyreport
                              1. 55

                                 EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                 Are you saying you're getting tired of people telling that you're using fallacies so often, you have to ask for clarification over and over because you still haven't figured it out?
                                 
                                 You have come to the conclusion of a designer because you can't imagine our world came into existence entirely on it's own. That would be the fallacy, a designer is not a conclusion to come to if there is no supporting evidence.
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 It isn't even a representation because it isn't valid to begin with, it's another blatant fallacy.
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 I've heard of him several times before, a Christian apologist. He's a joke.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                    interesting. still no actual arguments. just name calling. how insightful.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 55

                                       EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                       You asked me to explain the fallacy you were using and I did. What more do you want?
                                       
                                       Besides, you haven't explained how you arrived at the conclusion of a designer?

                                       report
                        2. 0

                           Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                           So the universe is about 14 billion years old and the earth came about 10 billion years after the universe started and humans finally arrived some 200,000 years ago and you think all of this is for us? One would think a God would have just made in appear in 6 days as described in the bible. But then this perfect, omni everything God would have to rest.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                              sure it seems self centered to think this is all for us. that doesn't mean it couldn't be though. i am obviously christian, but the arguments here are just for a creator in general. an argument for the christian God would come after a person accepts the possibility of a creator.  the bible says God rested on the 7th day, but not that he had to. Just that he did.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                 On the flip side of that are you open to the possibility that the universe could have been created without a God and or that the concept of a God only complicates and creates more questions about the origin of the universe than necessary?

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                                    sure i'm open to the possibility. i just think its more likely one does exist than not. i was once an atheist and was steered in the other direction. could happen again i guess, but i feel more convicted in my christian beliefs than i did as an atheist for multiple reasons.

                                    replyreport
      2. 0

         Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

         That's why the illusion is necessary.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            if its an illusion, right and wrong still don't exists either. what makes it necessary?

            replyreport
      3. 55

         EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

         Instincts are patterns of behavior in response to certain stimuli, which can easily explain watching the walking dead or being a packers fan.
         
         
         
         Same thing, if we can see the results of murder and rape on the victims and their families, we can easily conclude they are wrong, especially if we are the victim.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            are you saying that im a packers fan, because of events that have occurred in my life? kind of like a very complicated domino set up, where each event knocks down the other until that's the decision that i make. is that basically what you're saying, or am i not understanding?
            
            im confused on the murder and rape thing too. i understand seeing the effects on others lives and especially ours does make the average person not want to do it. instinctually though, what makes us care about that?

            replyreport
            1. 55

               EncephaloiDeadposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               If the events are football oriented, yes.
               
               
               
               I'm not sure what you're saying, what does this have to do with dominoes?
               
               
               
               Our evolved human nature of compassion and altruism coupled with the fact we don't want things like that happening to us so we don't do them to others.

               replyreport
2. 58

   squeeknomoreposted 9 years ago

   "We have free will to guide ourselves after the age of 15. (Depending on the parents.)
   *It takes about 15 years to develop enough ability and knowledge to guide our own wills.
   *The first six years of life is nature at work. Nature, (in conjunction with the soul's interactions with the environment) forms the psyche. It is during these early years from 0 to 15 yrs. that one learns to guide one's own will.
   *Will-power, won't-power and free-will are three different things." (by KLH)
   
   MM

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Where did you get 15? Is it a age you just made up?
      
      Humans don't become self aware until the age of about 2 and our brains aren't fully developed until the age of about 25. Where did 15 come from because a 5 year old makes decisions all day long. What young people don't have is mind control. They will typically do what ever they want all day and if they want to eat cookies they will, it's will power that they don't have yet.

      replyreport
   2. 58

      squeeknomoreposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      This information is based on the findings of a Doctor who worked with children and devoted her entire life to bettering the conditions of children. Her name was Maria Montessori.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

         Then I think you are misunderstanding what she said. Free will or making decision have nothing to do with maturity. Most 15 year olds would not do well without their parents.

         replyreport
3. 58

   squeeknomoreposted 9 years ago

   - what is free will to you? What makes it an "illusion?"

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rad Manposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      We are under the illusion that the future doesn't already exist. Physics tells us that the future present and past is still happening.

      replyreport
4. 76

   Hauntyposted 9 years ago

   A person who exercises free will sees all the causes around her that affect every aspect of her life and life choices. Nothing happens without a cause. She dominates her moods, characters, qualities, and powers, as well as the environment surrounding her. Do you think you are this person?
   
   Furthermore, it seems to me that in the most important areas of life we don't possess any amount of free will at all. Like when you fall in love with someone, do you really have a say in whom you fall in love with?

   replyreport