(April 9, 2013 at 1:59 pm)Baalzebutt Wrote: Because we experience time in a linear fashion, one must assume that the future does not exist.
Maybe true, perhaps you can elaborate? Because I don't understand how it implies the future doesn't exist if we experience it in a linear fashion.
Quote:From a naturalistic point of view, our brains function on a cocktail of chemicals. These chemicals not only influence, but are the deciding factor in the decisions we make. To remove the decision making process from its biological element is to presuppose the existence of the soul, which, by naturalistic standards, does not exist. The implication here is that we are somehow prisoners of our brains when, in point of fact, we ARE our brains. Therefore, the decisions we make are necessarily of free will, as dictated by our brain regardless of chemistry or physical damage.
I don't see how the conclusion follows. I'm not going to try to prove the opposite, but I don't see because we our brains or produced by the brain, that somehow it implies we are free. What makes you think if the brain is free, we are deciding things as opposed to seemingly getting the impression we are deciding?
Quote:Perhaps we need to define "free will". By your argument, it appears that in order to have free will we must be absolutely unencumbered by brain chemistry or any other factor that might influence us. This, however, is an impossibility because, aside from living in a complete vacuum, we are influenced by outside forces.
So, just to be clear, what is your idea of free will?
My idea is not that we decide things in a vacuum. But that in our decisions, there is some will that can choose between decisions, some generated freedom, that we aren't helpless to chose otherwise and get the impression that we chose because it's according to our will. Moreover it's the ability to will our will.