Free Will: Fact or Fiction

[Anomalocaris]

There is a variety of factors that influence our will. But I would say despite that, at the end, we have enough struggle room, for there to be free-will.

Support the existence of boundary where factors of influence ends and struggle room begins.

[Whateverist]

So I wonder if you believe in hell or an afterlife? Don't most of you Christian guys see it as a reward or punishment as the case may be? If so, how do you reconcile that with your position that we have no freewill? Not that I care whether what you believe makes sense or not, especially if you accept that you are totally determined. What choice do you have anyway?

[Reforged]

Um...no. Just because something appears to be so, that does not shift the burden of proof.

And we could do an experiment to show that our will is not free, however, the one I'm thinking of would require smashing someone's frontal lobe.

Shame fr0d0 isn't still here, he wouldn't even notice.

---

I know it's become fashionable lately to say that we don't have free will, but I don't buy it. We appear to have free will, so I think the burden of proof is on those who say we don't. I would like to see an experiment proposed to show that our will is not free.

We appear to have free will do we? How so?

[IATIA]

I know it's become fashionable lately to say that we don't have free will, but I don't buy it. We appear to have free will, so I think the burden of proof is on those who say we don't. I would like to see an experiment proposed to show that our will is not free.

Ask and ye shall receive.

Read more here:

Dr. Libet measured the response time between the moment the brain of a patient was stimulated and the time the patient became consciously aware of the stimulus. He found there was a consistent half-second delay between the patients' unconscious reaction and their conscious awareness of the stimulus.

Here is a newer experiment.

[Reasonable_Jeff]

So what you're saying is that god claimed we had free will, but not only do we not, but god sometimes influences our decisions subconciously? Then how can anyone go to heaven or hell?

God doesn't say that we have free will and there are many cases in the Bible where God does influence's man's decisions. For example Pharaoh in Egpyt, we are told maybe four or five times that God is the one who hardened his heart and it is mentioned again Rom 9 as God doing it.

Rom 9:15-18
15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

If justice is carried out all humans would go to hell because all are guilty of sin, however, God has mercy on some, those whom His Son atoned for on the cross....it is those that will come to believe in Him.

(once again, I'm not trying to state this as fact or be preachy - just explains my beliefs)

[Darkstar]

God doesn't say that we have free will and there are many cases in the Bible where God does influence's man's decisions.

(bolding mine)
We can go to hell for doing things we could not control?hock:

[Reforged]

God doesn't say that we have free will and there are many cases in the Bible where God does influence's man's decisions.

(bolding mine)
We can go to hell for doing things we could not control?hock:

Well now, that does sound unfair.
I can't wait to hear the response.

[IATIA]

God doesn't say that we have free will and there are many cases in the Bible where God does influence's man's decisions.

(bolding mine)
We can go to hell for doing things we could not control?hock:

It is the "mystery of god"!

[Tino]

We appear to have free will do we? How so?

The lack of evidence to the contrary is what convinces me.

---

However, as I was saying, chemical reactions in our brain control us and from what I've heard, scientists have actually done brain scans on people, observing the chemical reaction that leads them to make a choice before the choice is actually made. I still think we're slaves to those chemical reactions in our brain, if not for our entire consciousness being those chemical reactions in the first place.

I found the conclusions from those studies to be grossly over-extended. Here's an explanation of it, better than I can write, from this article http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201...free-will/

For instance, doesn’t neuroscience show that our brains make decisions before we are conscious of them such that our conscious decisions are bypassed? With these questions, we can move past the debates about whether free will requires souls or indeterminism — debates that neuroscience does not settle — and examine actual neuroscientific evidence. Consider, for instance, research by neuroscientists suggesting that non-conscious processes in our brain cause our actions, while conscious awareness of what we are doing occurs later, too late to influence our behavior. Some interpret this research as showing that consciousness is merely an observer of the output of non-conscious mechanisms. Extending the paradigm developed by Benjamin Libet, John-Dylan Haynes and his collaborators used fMRI research to find patterns of neural activity in people’s brains that correlated with their decision to press either a right or left button up to seven seconds before they were aware of deciding which button to press. Haynes concludes: “How can I call a will ‘mine’ if I don’t even know when it occurred and what it has decided to do?”

However, the existing evidence does not support the conclusion that free will is an illusion. First of all, it does not show that a decision has been made before people are aware of having made it. It simply finds discernible patterns of neural activity that precede decisions. If we assume that conscious decisions have neural correlates, then we should expect to find early signs of those correlates “ramping up” to the moment of consciousness. It would be miraculous if the brain did nothing at all until the moment when people became aware of a decision to move. These experiments all involve quick, repetitive decisions, and people are told not to plan their decisions but just to wait for an urge to come upon them. The early neural activity measured in the experiments likely represents these urges or other preparations for movement that precede conscious awareness.

This is what we should expect with simple decisions. Indeed, we are lucky that conscious thinking plays little or no role in quick or habitual decisions and actions. If we had to consciously consider our every move, we’d be bumbling fools. We’d be like perpetual beginners at tennis, overthinking every stroke. We’d be unable to speak fluently, much less dance or drive. Often we initially attend consciously to what we are doing precisely to reach the point where we act without consciously attending to the component decisions and actions in our complex endeavors. When we type, tango, or talk, we don’t want conscious thinking to precede every move we make, though we do want to be aware of what we’re doing and correct any mistakes we’re making. Conscious attention is relatively slow and effortful. We must use it wisely.

[genkaus]

It's weird how in discussions about free-will vs determinism, people forget exactly why they care about the question in the first place. Suppose you did have metaphysical free-will - that is, your actions are not determined by any cause. Set aside the fact that there is not evidence of such a thing - but if you are fighting for the concept, there must be a reason for it. Basically, people argue for free-will because they are uncomfortable with the idea of not being in control of their actions. But in case of metaphysical free-will, i.e. will without cause, you are still not in control of your actions. They are essentially causeless.

I, for one. believe in free-will. I believe that our actions are completely determined by the chemical/neurological processes in our minds. I also believe that the sum total of those processes define who we are. Thus, I believe that our will, while free from any external forces or causes, is still determined completely by us.

---

Did you choose your parents or what they would teach you?

No, but I chose what I'd learn.

Did you choose the time period and culture that you would be born in?

No, but I chose which parts to accept from it and which to reject.

Did you choose the opportunities that would be made available to you in life?

No, but I chose what to do with them.

Did you choose your personality or preferences?

Parts of them, yeah.

On top of all that, you at all times choose what you most desire, our decisions are chained/limited by what our greatest desire is (you can have conflicting ones).....but we can't even choose our desires.

Wrong. Given that we can change our desires.

I believe only God can change your desire. I believe that by nature people do not find God appealing.

It's only by God's intervening that anyone would see a relationship with Him as desirable or even plausible.

I believe that (for real Christians) God changes the desires of your heart and allows you to see Him as He is....glorious.

These are my opinions as a Reformed Christian. I am not stating them as fact so please no "prove it" statements. I'm simply wanting to throw in as it were.

This part is pure garbage. You can throw it out - as it were.