A thing about religious (and other) people and the illusion of free will

[Ahriman]

@ShinyCrystals

I think that goes to show that such people who support and even defend such people or a deity show well that free will does not exist.

This doesn't follow. Nobody is forcing people to worship these entities/people/deities. Not unless you want to imagine these entities/people/deities are not only real but also have special powers that allow them to influence or control people's behavior against their will.

(The voice actress' name is Tara Strong, by the way)

No.....not Rikku.....I'm going to go ahead and assume this was willful ignorance on her part, I don't think someone as clever as Tara Strong would actually believe in NFT's and alternative medicine, although being Jewish is not such a bad thing at all.

[The Grand Nudger]

I mean, I'd sure hope that gods had those special powers™ - because we lowly human worms do. It'd be fucking hilarious if this was yet another thing that people can do, that gods can't.

[Ahriman]

I mean, I'd sure hope that gods had those special powers™ - because we lowly human worms do.  It'd be fucking hilarious if this was yet another thing that people can do, that gods can't.

Or maybe gods consider it beneath them to force people to do things? Maybe they're looking for consent?

[The Grand Nudger]

The same can be applied to religion and God, as people who worship and support such people do not seem to go by their own perspective rather than those they support. It is like those people don't have a will of their own, and they are not free mentally because they rely on others rather than developing their own thoughts. It is hard to have free will when you are dependent too much on someone else and your thoughts are not your own.

You do see what I mean here, do you?

It's not so much that the thoughts aren't their own as a religion is explicitly normative and collective.  A vision of how the world should be backed up by a sizeable community committed to the possibility that it could be and acting to effect it.  Not just acting -in- the world, acting -on- it.  Acting on themselves, acting on others, acting on the world around them.  Whether we have a free will or not this is basically the most disadvantaged scenario for private decision making.  

I think it helps to remember that religion isn't something that just happens to people.  Nothing just happens.  Things take time and planning and manpower and effort.  Sure, you could be born into a religious family but you are not religious, yourself, until you participate in the religious effort.  At that point questions of freedom in will and any number of other things are fundamentally moot.  At that point, whether you freely willed it or not, you do believe that the world should be that way, and you do believe you have a duty to pitch in to that outcome.  A religious person no longer needs to be compelled ..more accurately, they are or have become the compelling force themselves.

[ShinyCrystals]

The same can be applied to religion and God, as people who worship and support such people do not seem to go by their own perspective rather than those they support. It is like those people don't have a will of their own, and they are not free mentally because they rely on others rather than developing their own thoughts. It is hard to have free will when you are dependent too much on someone else and your thoughts are not your own.

You do see what I mean here, do you?

It's not so much that the thoughts aren't their own as a religion is explicitly normative and collective.  A vision of how the world should be backed up by a sizeable community committed to the possibility that it could be and acting to effect it.  Not just acting -in- the world, acting -on- it.  Acting on themselves, acting on others, acting on the world around them.  Whether we have a free will or not this is basically the most disadvantaged scenario for private decision making.  

I think it helps to remember that religion isn't something that just happens to people.  Nothing just happens.  Things take time and planning and manpower and effort.  Sure, you could be born into a religious family but you are not religious, yourself, until you participate in the religious effort.  At that point questions of freedom in will and any number of other things are fundamentally moot.  At that point, whether you freely willed it or not, you do believe that the world should be that way, and you do believe you have a duty to pitch in to that outcome.  A religious person no longer needs to be compelled ..more accurately, they are or have become the compelling force themselves.

I do know all that. I probably should have mention that things like religion are rather taught, among other things.

I just think that humans, especially at a young age, tend to copy, or go with the behaviors as well as ideals of others, especially their families, and once they become hardcore thinkers or so dedicated to their beliefs, especially in regards to religion, they might not be “free” from doing what God(s) may want them to do, if you know what I mean, as sometimes, they may do what a so called “supreme being” may want them to do instead of what they think they should do on their own.

Even if free will and independent thinking are two different things, I would not call the people I am describing “independent” for reasons I described, as some people can’t seemingly think for themselves.

Maybe I shouldn’t have used the term free will here?

[Ahriman]

It's not so much that the thoughts aren't their own as a religion is explicitly normative and collective.  A vision of how the world should be backed up by a sizeable community committed to the possibility that it could be and acting to effect it.  Not just acting -in- the world, acting -on- it.  Acting on themselves, acting on others, acting on the world around them.  Whether we have a free will or not this is basically the most disadvantaged scenario for private decision making.  

I think it helps to remember that religion isn't something that just happens to people.  Nothing just happens.  Things take time and planning and manpower and effort.  Sure, you could be born into a religious family but you are not religious, yourself, until you participate in the religious effort.  At that point questions of freedom in will and any number of other things are fundamentally moot.  At that point, whether you freely willed it or not, you do believe that the world should be that way, and you do believe you have a duty to pitch in to that outcome.  A religious person no longer needs to be compelled ..more accurately, they are or have become the compelling force themselves.

I do know all that. I probably should have mention that things like religion are rather taught, among other things.

I just think that humans, especially at a young age, tend to copy, or go with the behaviors as well as ideals of others, especially their families, and once they become hardcore thinkers or so dedicated to their beliefs, especially in regards to religion, they might not be “free” from doing what God(s) may want them to do, if you know what I mean, as sometimes, they may do what a so called “supreme being” may want them to do instead of what they think they should do on their own.

Even if free will and independent thinking are two different things, I would not call the people I am describing “independent” for reasons I described, as some people can’t seemingly think for themselves.

Maybe I shouldn’t have used the term free will here?

Religion isn't taught. People are either naturally religious or not.

[The Grand Nudger]

Broken clocks.

It's the specific content of a particular religion that has to be taught. Religious ideation, otoh, comes factory standard on all of us. We don't all believe that the world should be a specific way for a particular reason, but we all have the experience of thinking the world should be some way. That some things are forbidden or taboo. That some things are sacred and compelling. That this or that thing should be changed from what it is, to whatever that is, with respect to those apprehensions. That's both why and how specific and particular religions can arise. Yet another thing we apparently have no choice in. Even dissenting religious ideologies are based on the premise of rejecting our intuition in this regard - thus implicitly acknowledging the very thing.

IIR we've had this convo already, and we're going to be committed to drowning that minor blip of accuracy in a vast gulf of bullshit. Correct?

[ShinyCrystals]

I do know all that. I probably should have mention that things like religion are rather taught, among other things.

I just think that humans, especially at a young age, tend to copy, or go with the behaviors as well as ideals of others, especially their families, and once they become hardcore thinkers or so dedicated to their beliefs, especially in regards to religion, they might not be “free” from doing what God(s) may want them to do, if you know what I mean, as sometimes, they may do what a so called “supreme being” may want them to do instead of what they think they should do on their own.

Even if free will and independent thinking are two different things, I would not call the people I am describing “independent” for reasons I described, as some people can’t seemingly think for themselves.

Maybe I shouldn’t have used the term free will here?

Religion isn't taught. People are either naturally religious or not.

People are not born religious. Plus, discrimination is a thing that is taught, so if that can be taught, so can religion. I am sure it is not a natural thing.

Plus, how can people be religious as babies when they are born? They are not developed to think about things like even religion at that stage of life.

[ShinyCrystals]

Broken clocks.

It's the specific content of a particular religion that has to be taught. Religious ideation, otoh, comes factory standard on all of us. We don't all believe that the world should be a specific way for a particular reason, but we all have the experience of thinking the world should be some way. That some things are forbidden or taboo. That some things are sacred and compelling. That this or that thing should be changed from what it is, to whatever that is, with respect to those apprehensions.

IIR we've had this convo already, and we're going to be committed to drowning that minor blip of accuracy in a vast gulf of bullshit. Correct?

If by religious standard, you mean simple belief, yeah, that makes since. Still, religion is synonymous with belief, and that does not have to be about a supreme being at birth, right?

[Ahriman]

Who are the broken ones? The religious or the non-religious?