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

[Gawdzilla Sama]

^^^ A response to something you've never seen/read before and don't understand. Definitely no free will there.

I think I see what you mean, but aside from that, I thought he meant I made up a word such as vaxxer, which is probably an internet term about people who are willing to go with vaccines, particularly the COVID-19 one.

If that is not the case, I do apologize for the confusion.

That be a "3" response. Haven't done one of those in a few decades. Desert Shield, maybe.

[The Grand Nudger]

It is, at least as the people who make the claim would have it. Then religious people take that claim and try to sell further goods not in evidence. Par for the course.

[ShinyCrystals]

It is, at least as the people who make the claim would have it.  Then religious people take that claim and try to sell further goods not in evidence.  Par for the course.

Yeah.

I mean, we all have our religious ideations, and they are, more or less, different. Even having a general consensus or general agreement on things can only do so much to appease everyone. It is natural, though.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and there we go, we all have our religioius ideations. Theyre natural to us. The dispute is not between religious ideation and it's antithesis, it's between competing religious ideations. The current crop is garbage, and we need a better quality of....going forward.

[ShinyCrystals]

-and there we go, we all have our religioius ideations.   Theyre natural to us. The dispute is not between religious ideation and it's antithesis, it's between competing religious ideations.  The current crop is garbage, and we need a better quality of....going forward.

Sorry for the late reply, I was busy.

But yeah, I do agree on all counts.

Here is another thing that people may have that I think has to do with what I have been saying, to an extent.

Despite what some people think and may deny, we are animals. Humans, in particular, are said to be in the ape category of the animal kingdom. Further, we are only mostly different from animals mentally and socially, but we still more than often display animal behavior. We even go by hierarchies in terms of power and dominance, like how most animals do. We also tend to do animal things like hunting, fighting, killing, communicating, those kind of things; if in different ways compared to other animals, given how advanced we humans are. In terms of killing, that, of course, is not allowed by law in many or all areas, but people still do it, and they do it based on animal-based behaviors they still have rather than being reasonable and more humane. That said, humans can still be more animal-like, and in fact, they still have to develop to become more humane, or human overall. I would say the less developed a person is, or turns out to be, the more animal-like they may be. This may not always be the case, but you should know what I mean.

I think these animal behaviors we have not only affects emotions, but interferes with the human ability to choose, let alone the right decision from the wrong one. In other words, if free will were to exist, the animal behavior that humans still have to this day is a factor that limits or hinders free will in terms of what choices are made, wouldn't you say?

Still, just because humans are socially and mentally different in plenty of ways from other animals, does not mean we are fully unique and are completely something else other than animals.

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think it's exactly clear what an existent free will would do, or how effective it would be at whatever that is. Can we freely will not to be short and irritable when we're hungry? Seemingly not. Or, if we prefer, even though we can freely will not to do that, it happens anyway, in spite of that decision.

[Ahriman]

I don't think it's exactly clear what an existent free will would do, or how effective it would be at whatever that is.  Can we freely will not to be short and irritable when we're hungry?  Seemingly not.  Or, if we prefer, even though we can freely will not to do that, it happens anyway, in spite of that decision.

Everyone always does what they prefer. Literally one hundred percent of the time. It would never be any different. So it's like, we have free will, but only the free will to do what we wanted to do and were going to do anyway. You are always just doing what you prefer to be doing.

[The Grand Nudger]

I doubt that many people prefer talking to you, and yet....

The "free will" to do whatever you were always going to do anyway is just will. Not free.

[Ahriman]

I doubt that many people prefer talking to you, and yet....

The "free will" to do whatever you were always going to do anyway is just will.  Not free.

Plenty of people in my personal life have preferred talking to me.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yet another instance of not being able to keep your story straight. A good example of the limits of free will even assuming there is such a thing. A compulsive liar will lie. The lie may not help them, the lie will often shame them, they may not even want to lie - but....they will lie.