RE: Question for Atheists
August 26, 2014 at 9:47 am
(This post was last modified: August 26, 2014 at 9:47 am by ManMachine.)
(August 26, 2014 at 8:59 am)robvalue Wrote: I think the initial post touches somewhat on my favourite subject, free will. If we're all just chemicals and we follow the laws of nature and person A is led to the conclusion that god exists, and person B is led to the conclusion that this claim is untrue, how can either be wrong?
If in fact there was no other way things could have happened, because there is no free will, then indeed neither position is "right" or "wrong", but in fact nothing means anything at all. No one is making any decisions, this is not a discussion, it's me being a puppet typing.
Personally I don't believe we have free will, I think it is desirable to consider ourselves more than the sum of our parts and somehow in control. I don't know if this can ever be proven true or false, but from the way I see science going and experiments about being able to predict your decisions before you "think" you have made them, I feel free will could end up being discounted.
But nothing is to be gained by assuming we don't have free will, you can only lose, in the case that you actually did. And nothing can be proved from assuming no free will, because nothing means anything and no other events could be happening.
We have to make certain fundamental assumptions before we can even begin to reason at all:
1) What we experience is real, or at least a realistic interpretation of reality
2) We have free will, and so can choose to reason one way or another
You've hit on a very valid point. Every discussion on Free will I read seems to boil it down to simple single choice issues, but this is not representational of reality. Free will, or lack of it, still means the subconscious call to action operates in a strategic framework that has many possibilities, and some actions may be designed to specifically illicit counter-reactions that in and of themselves may be the desired outcome or lead to the desired outcome for the initiator.
On many occasions I am aware I am acting in a certain way just to find out how people around me will act in response, it's a very revealing strategy.
I see morality as a social strategy. Someone posted earlier that murder is universally wrong, then went on to say in certain groups it was accepted, which means its not universally wrong. the poster might want to believe it is universally wrong but clearly it isn't. If everyone thought murder was wrong then there would be no one to fight our wars. Morality is never static, Milgram's experiment demonstrates our ability to submit to authority despite that morality, the 'prisoner's dilemma' demonstrates how we are likely to secure the best outcome for ourselves as individuals when put in situations with unknown outcomes.
In nature there is no 'good', just nature. 'Good' is a human social expression (it has no use for an individual outside a social context) and we don't need a god to tell us we are human.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
