RE: If free will was not real
August 17, 2016 at 4:46 pm
(This post was last modified: August 17, 2016 at 4:48 pm by GrandizerII.)
(August 17, 2016 at 4:11 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(August 17, 2016 at 3:54 pm)Irrational Wrote: I agree with those premises but reach a different conclusion because I'm using imo a better definition of free as related to will. Even if I don't actually consciously make the decisions but are simply made aware of them after the fact, and even though external factors certainly play a role in the decision making process in an indirect manner, if it's my brain formulating these decisions, then it's still me (arbitrarily) making these decisions, though I may not be consciously making them. It's not like I end up consciously disapproving of these decisions. So I still do what I desire to do.
A better definition of free.....that doesn't explicitly reference, require, or depend upon any concept or meaning associated with what it means to be...free?
Is it better in the sense that it is more descriptive or informative (as regards freedom), or better in the sense that it allows you to maintain what you could not otherwise(as regards will)? As examples.
I can roll with it being you who makes decisions. Are they free?
Consciously, unconsciously (a bit of a noncognitive if were talking about decisions), either way. Are they free?
You desire to do this, you desire to do that. Is that free?
Do -any- of those comments you offered speak to freedom, in what way, free of what, how, and how might we be able to tell?
I am free in that I can often times make choices without coercion, and that these choices are often in accordance with who I am by nature.
Now if you want to nitpick about what it means to be coerced, or who I am as a person, you might as well nitpick about what it means to be alive, or to love, or to be rational, and so on. If you go deep enough, and you want to be really technical, all these ideas end up being doubtable anyway.