Do you believe in free will?

[Perhaps]

Let's take this from a different perspective. You assert that mind creates reality, that perception is a requisite of existence. However, one can't experience their non-existence, whether we're talking about you specifically, or some mind in a larger sense. So by your rules, non-existence can't be real. Moreover, you personally, must be infinitely old, never have been asleep or unconscious, that you have always existed. Is that what you believe, that you are infinitely old, have never slept or been unconscious, and that you have never not existed?

I find it incredible that anyone could believe these things, yet they seem a natural consequence of your assumptions. Or perhaps you've got some sophistry to get around them — we don't actually sleep, we just remember having done something we did not do, or whatever.

First, I think you'll find many people who view the flaws built into our perceptions in your view — believing we sleep when we don't, believing in comets that don't exist — the sum total of errors in our naive worldview is greater under your view than under say, naive realism; I find it hard to see this as a movement into greater clarity — it would seem we have less truth and knowledge under your framework, even accepting it's assumptions.

However this last bit, that non-existence can't exist or be real because there is no mind to make it real, I find that to be little more than an accounting trick, akin to banning subtraction and negative numbers from our accounting: "Whoah! Look! We made a profit this quarter!" Well of course you made a profit. Because you've rigged the rules of the game.

Different perspectives are always welcome. First, the mind creates a model of reality - the mind is what allows for things to exist in our model realities. You are correct that one is not able to perceive their non-existence (though they may conceptualize). Non-existence is then real in so far as it is a concept which we have assigned certain (non)properties. What brings you to the conclusion that I must be infinitely old, or that I am never able to sleep? (I'm assuming you mean that I am unconscious during deep sleep, which in that case I would say that my mind doesn't cease to exist, it simply isn't aware for that short duration). Also, how does it follow that I have never 'not existed'? My mind has come into existence in the true material world, the only thing which vanishes when my mind ceases is my model of reality.

Sure, you're correct that it doesn't make things any more clear. My position just allows for things which materialism does not, which is why I hold it. Under my position the ideas of truth and knowledge are completely different from the materialist opinion; truth is subjective to my model of reality and knowledge is truly limited to the capabilities of the mind. Some aren't OK with this kind of modest approach to the world and require tangible evidence for all that exists, if you feel that way then I would suggest taking up materialism as your metaphysical position of the world's state.

Non-existence can exist as a concept, but it could never be perceived. It would be like asking to perceive nothing; you can conceptualize what it's attributes are (or aren't), but you could never perceive it.

---

This sounds more or less correct. I guess we can establish some of the statements here as what we both accept upto this point.

1. True material world exists, and that we perceive parts of that world.
2. Our perceptions do reflect the true material world, I believe, but the model of reality we experience is just our bits of perception pieced together.
3. Our minds are external from this model of reality.

I've a little problem with this statement:
"we perceive our existence within our models of reality"

As you established earlier, our mind is basically what we are. Therefore, our mind (and therefore us) is outside the models of reality. How can we exist external to the model of reality and still perceive our existence within it? This may be an error of wording, where you are actually trying to say conceptualize instead of perceive.

Now we have established some basic premises that we agree on, you can go ahead and justify how those premises lead to free-will within the model of reality created and how is that of any use to us in the physical reality.

Premise 4 should then be stated as: The mind conceptualizes our existence within our models of reality

I'll try to address the physical reality first. It wouldn't be of any use in the true material world if we possessed free will inside of our models of reality. Now that that's been sorted, let's move on to how free will exists in our models of reality.

The model of reality is created by the mind by gathering perceptions received from the true material world (though we can never be sure how closely they resemble the true material world). This would mean that both the mind and the perceptions which it receives are external to the conceptualized world. Both being the creator of and being external from the model of reality would allow the mind the ability to control, or at least have influence on, the model of reality. This influence is referred to as free will and is what gives us reign over our conceptualized existence.

Essentially I view the issue as free will being 'truly' illusory, but since we live in a self conceived illusion (I know you won't like my wording of our concepts of reality) we're fine with accepting the influence of this additional illusion. To our conceptual existence free will is real, the same way the world as we perceive it is real. Outside of our created model of reality our free will is null and void, but we can never know what its like outside of our model of reality.

---

TheJackel: OK