jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (13 posts)

Free Will - Self contradictory?

  1. Dgerrimea profile image64
    Dgerrimeaposted 8 years ago

    Hey everyone.
    I've got a feeling that there is no free will. My train of thought is thus:

    Either each event (B) has a cause (A), or it does not have a cause.

    If A causes B, then you can never have one without the other, thus each is proof of the other. If B is not caused, then B is necessarily random, as its nature and/or qualities are not the result of the nature/qualities of the universe, because it was not caused by anything (in the universe).

    Most people's definition of free will requires that there be multiple possible outcomes, and a conscious decider to pick one. If the concious decider (A) picks one (B), then there was only one choice. If there was more than one choice, there could be no cause for any of them.


    1. mohitmisra profile image61
      mohitmisraposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Where are these thoughts coming from? From god the source who is orchestrating this entire universe.We are like puppets playing out our part. smile

  2. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 8 years ago

    You are comparing cause and effect against free will of choice?

    This comparsion isn't fair.

    Free will is about thoughts and the ability to think such thoughts. How you act on those thoughts is what cause and effect is really.

    Cause and effect happens only when action has been taken. The effect the cause creates is determined by what sort of action was taken.

    Self-contradictory? No in the slightest. Being SELF-responsible for your own thoughts and actions, you can limit the cause and effect, on society.

    1. The Rope profile image56
      The Ropeposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Cagsil, I may be missing the point but while I agree with your first two points, the last assumes that each effect is "caused" by said person which isn't always true.  I personally believe the domino effect - every cause does have an effect but it may or may not be to the person making the decision.

  3. Dgerrimea profile image64
    Dgerrimeaposted 8 years ago

    But even thought processes are events which were either caused or not caused. If they were caused, then they are part of the 'domino' chain and there is no real choice because there is no real outcome. If they are not caused, then they are random and unrelated to personality, desire, anything else. It would be like making every decision by rolling some dice, only less deterministic.

  4. Inspirepub profile image80
    Inspirepubposted 8 years ago

    You are assuming that only one outcome exists in "reality".

    If you look at quantum physics, it is entirely possible that all the alternatives are equally real, and the "choice" is not which alternative will become "real" and all others then become "not real", but rather, which alternative to observe/experience in this "lifetime" - sequence of moments of experience.

    In that case, both free will and determinism are true, across an infinite number of possible universes. Each sequence of events is determined (including determinations made by the mechanism of random selection), and every possible sequence of events actually exists at once.

    Free will enters in when one point of consciousness moves along a sequence, as it can can only visit one branch of each choice point.

    The other branches do not cease to exist, but they become invisible (inexperiencable) to the point of consciousness once it is on the part of the timeline "after" the choice is made.


    1. Dgerrimea profile image64
      Dgerrimeaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Free will and determinism aren't qualities of a particle, they are, and if my logic is valid and sound, then there can never be free will in any universe.

      And even if you do play the quantum card and say that multiple possible outcomes can exist/co exist, then you are agreeing with me because the conscious agent is not the one making the choice.

      Events are either caused or random. Neither option allows for free will.

  5. profile image0
    sneakorocksolidposted 8 years ago

    Do you mean free will or free agency?

    1. Dgerrimea profile image64
      Dgerrimeaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      What are your definitions of these terms?

  6. kess profile image60
    kessposted 8 years ago

    We cannot deny the reality of the free will in the decisions we are faced with in our lives.

    But as we seek to understand further, we do realize our limitations. These limitations though does not negate the reality of free will but rather embraces them.

    The limitations are a result of our individual thoughts can be ultimately categorized in to Good or evil.

    As we continue further we would also realize that truth and Good are inextricably linked likewise lies and evil.

    For any evil to exist it must be  established with some good or truth otherwise it will self destruct. And therefore for Good to exist, it must be with purity of truth, for any lie will corrupt good and transform it into evil. 

    I have said all this to say, yes there is a freewill which is embraced by the motivation for Good or for evil of which all truth vs truth and lie as the options.

    If you then contend that I have proven that freewill does not exist for we are either agents for Good using only truth as our standard, or we are agents for evil using some truth and some lies as our standard.
    I also fully agree.

    All good exist as God and truth exist as his Son Christ.

  7. aka-dj profile image76
    aka-djposted 8 years ago

    I do not have the (free) will to answer this question. It's my destiny.
    Something forced my hand and fingers to type. lol

  8. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 8 years ago

    Free Will is the inheritance we should leave to our children

    1. aka-dj profile image76
      aka-djposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      "They" will find a way to tax that too!