Free Will vs Determinism

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote:
The God that is reasonable and acceptable to everybody atheists included is the God which is subjective not institutionalised.
The God that is reasonable and acceptable to everyone does not exist, I'm afraid. Nobody's acceptable to everyone...not even the Supreme Being. And that's the point: we're here to make up our minds, on this equivocal stage called Earth, whether we prefer to be with God or not.

Some prefer not. The Bible calls them those who "did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved." (2 Thessalonians 2:10)

I'd better have written " The God that is reasonable and acceptable to each and all, atheists included, is the God which is subjective not an institution".

The Bible is an institution. The effect of The Bible's being institutionalised is that believers such as yourself,
Immanuel, quote The Bible as if it were entirely wise.

Saint Paul was a very clever man who took Christianity to the Gentiles. Despite his fame and cleverness St Paul is not to be taken too seriously, and if you wish to quote him you might want to do so to illustrate a point but not to present evidence.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 6:40 pm The Bible is an institution. The effect of The Bible's being institutionalised is that believers such as yourself,
Immanuel, quote The Bible as if it were entirely wise.
Well, it's a good deal wiser than me, I'll admit. It's not for nothing that it has been around a good deal longer than my memory will be. :wink:
Saint Paul was a very clever man who took Christianity to the Gentiles. Despite his fame and cleverness St Paul is not to be taken too seriously, and if you wish to quote him you might want to do so to illustrate a point but not to present evidence.
I was merely pointing out the wisdom of that particular realization; that ultimately, nothing can be proved to those who simply will not be persuaded. Even a Resurrection would not be a big enough miracle for that. So though that's the chief miracle the Bible offers in attestation of its case, the Book itself recognizes that for some folks, nothing is ever enough.

A "miracle" then, (since you were asking about a definition of such) is, among other things, a divine communication to mankind. However, it can only convey its message to those who are listening to it. Or as Christ Himself put it, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." We've all got ears. Not all of us have hearing ears. The will to hear is part of the ability to hear.

That's actually pretty profound, I would say.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Arising_uk »

Immanuel Can wrote:I was merely pointing out the wisdom of that particular realization; that ultimately, nothing can be proved to those who simply will not be persuaded. ...
Sort of like those who believe in something no-one has ever been able to demonstrate eh! :lol:

Why would one have to be 'persuaded about something existing? Just show them one, this is called proving something exists in objective reality or even just proving something exists in inter-subjective reality. Hence if one someone doesn't believe my cat exists I show them it sitting upon the mat. Of course they could just disbelieve that it is there or even real, so I then chuck it at them and see the response.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote:
I was merely pointing out the wisdom of that particular realization; that ultimately, nothing can be proved to those who simply will not be persuaded.
I do actually see your point of view, although I cannot understand how someone who like yourself has good use of English is unable or unwillling to see the question of religious faith (and I include Free Will as a tenet of religious faith) from the point of view of the scientific enlightenment.

I don't seek to persuade but to learn.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Dubious »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 7:29 pm So though that's the chief miracle the Bible offers in attestation of its case, the Book itself recognizes that for some folks, nothing is ever enough.
...especially if "nothing" is all that is offered historically and evidentially. But for some hearsay is enough to create an acceptable truth where non exists which constitutes the entire meaning and modus of faith.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 7:55 pmI do actually see your point of view, although I cannot understand how someone who like yourself has good use of English is unable or unwillling to see the question of religious faith (and I include Free Will as a tenet of religious faith) from the point of view of the scientific enlightenment.
What particular tenet of (what the 18th Century self-importantly termed) "The Enlightenment" did you have in mind? Are you speaking of Kant? Or Voltaire and Rousseau? Of Bacon or Newton? Of Locke? Or of something more modern? What aspect of "the scientific enlightenment" do you suppose me not to be taking into account?

I just have to ask.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dubious wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 8:36 pm ...especially if "nothing" is all that is offered historically and evidentially. But for some hearsay is enough to create an acceptable truth where non exists which constitutes the entire meaning and modus of faith.
Or especially if there IS evidence, but certain people just refuse to listen...or even to open their eyes to what's around them. There's not a lot one can do with that sort of decision-not-to-know. Those who want not to know will simply get what they wish.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote:
What particular tenet of (what the 18th Century self-importantly termed) "The Enlightenment" did you have in mind? Are you speaking of Kant? Or Voltaire and Rousseau? Of Bacon or Newton? Of Locke? Or of something more modern? What aspect of "the scientific enlightenment" do you suppose me not to be taking into account?
Sociology, anthropology, and history as modern academic disciplines, and their influence upon the man in the street. The scientific endeavour is a method which follows principles of scepticism and probability.

Your arguments for old- time faith are either cynically polemical or else you simply don't understand that for instance all of those moderns whom you mention, above, are sceptics.

Precisely, what is your objection to scepticism, with particular reference to Biblical criticism, or to Free Will?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 8:32 am Sociology, anthropology, and history as modern academic disciplines,...
Ah. I fear you sound as if you perhaps have the "outsider's" shiny-eyed reverence for these things. You may think they sort of answered all important questions back in...what did you call it? "The scientific enlightenment." That's the urban legend, alright.

I wonder who told you that "science" has answered everything...and why you believed him. But you should read a little modern scientific epistemology (from Popper forward) especially before investing too much credence in his song.
and their influence upon the man in the street.
Quite a different issue, as we shall see.
The scientific endeavour is a method which follows principles of scepticism and probability.
That does sound like something a "man in the street" might say. :wink: I have found that a lot of people have a kind of priestly reverence for what they imagine "science" to be; not as many who actually DO science who have the same reverence.

A little skepticism about what people say "science has shown" would be good.
Your arguments for old- time faith are either cynically polemical or else you simply don't understand that for instance all of those moderns whom you mention, above, are sceptics.
Who? Newton the Deist? Bacon (inventor of the scientific method itself, by the way), the passionate theologian? Or did you mean Kant the Pietist, or Locke the Protestant? :D They were indeed a kind of skeptic...Christian ones.

You know, before you claim somebody for the "skeptical" team, you should probably take a look at his jersey. :wink:
Precisely, what is your objection to skepticism?
None whatsoever. I love it. It's a great thing. I would only ever bother to object when it converts to irrational cynicism, the hard-headed, obdurate refusal to see any evidence anymore. Then it's a little toxic. Nobody needs that, I think we'd agree.
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by thedoc »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 2:51 pm
Belinda wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 8:32 am
Your arguments for old- time faith are either cynically polemical or else you simply don't understand that for instance all of those moderns whom you mention, above, are sceptics.
Who? Newton the Deist? Bacon (inventor of the scientific method itself, by the way), the passionate theologian? Or did you mean Kant the Pietist, or Locke the Protestant? :D They were indeed a kind of skeptic...Christian ones.

You know, before you claim somebody for the "skeptical" team, you should probably take a look at his jersey. :wink:
I would hope that you mean to actually ask the person what they believe and why. For example I believe the O T is mostly Judaeo/Christian mythology but I don't admit that in the church I attend, there are a few who believe the O T is a literal history and I don't feel like arguing with them. You must be careful where you ask them what they believe and how and when. If you frame the question in a certain way, they may get the idea that you are just fishing for confirmation of your own beliefs, and then will give you the answer that is expected. There are a few people that I discuss my own actual beliefs but mostly I just keep quiet. There is one older member of the congregation who states that "Humans are not Animals", and that is a very dangerous idea, it seems to have developed from the idea that Humans were a "Special Creation" of God, but this belief could lead to the idea that even if man messes up the planet and makes it unlivable, God will somehow intervene and take care of mankind. But this leads to a question of "what is good to God?", when a person dies a believer, that person is believed to go to heaven and be with God, what could be a greater good from God's point of view? I am a bit of a skeptic and I have gotten to the core belief that there is a God and I have decided that is enough. It was a revelation to learn that Christians didn't have to have all the answers.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

thedoc wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:48 pm I would hope that you mean to actually ask the person what they believe and why.
I will ask Newton and Bacon. But I won't be surprised if they're reticent to answer more than they already have in writing.
There is one older member of the congregation who states that "Humans are not Animals", and that is a very dangerous idea, it seems to have developed from the idea that Humans were a "Special Creation" of God, but this belief could lead to the idea that even if man messes up the planet and makes it unlivable, God will somehow intervene and take care of mankind.
Not so. Nothing in the Bible suggests this is so. Rather, humans were instructed to have care for the Earth, and hold it in stewardship, not possession -- the very thing, by the way, for which environmentalists are campaigning...that mankind should take stewardship responsibility for the planet. On this one issue, they should be sympathetic to Christians.

But to whom are mere humans (if Atheism is true) "responsible"? Future generations? They're not born yet. (Anyway, we're busy murdering them in the womb.) Ourselves? We're fine, just so long as we don't go to far, or as long as not everybody does...and we can guess that they won't. To whom do we owe a duty of environmental stewardship, then? Who will ever call us to account? Why should we care, then?

Worse still is the view that essentially, human beings are just animals. For if they are, there is absolutely no legitimacy in trying to convince them to steward the planet or care for it. We do not ask the dolphins or the foxes to do a single thing in that regard; and we, being "just animals," have not a stitch more duty to the environment than they do. :shock:

OR...the environmentalists are talking out of both sides of their mouths at once. They want human beings to be "just animals" when it comes to Evolutionism or any question of privilege, but they want to put the burden of being special upon us when it comes to being environmentally responsible. That's illogical. They can't have it both ways.
It was a revelation to learn that Christians didn't have to have all the answers.
True. They do, however, have to have enough to know what's worth believing. We all do.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel, Christians can be sceptics, and I'd guess that the best theologians are sceptics to a degree. Descartes, himself RC ,was the progenitor of scientific scepticism.

You yourself put up such a poor argument for miracles because you lack scepticism. You lack scepticism perhaps because you like to be devious, and if you were properly sceptical you would have to face up to probabilities which it pleases you to ignore.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 5:36 pm Immanuel, Christians can be sceptics...
Indeed they can. Instances abound.
You yourself put up such a poor argument for miracles because you lack scepticism.
You never asked for one.

You're funny. I remember you saying to me, "You never answered the question I implied," i.e. a question you never actually asked! :D

I don't feel the burden to read anybody else's mind. And I wonder that you think I should simply magically anticipate your wishes.

I would suggest you should ask for what you want, or you won't be likely to get it...from anyone. That's a good rule for life. :wink:
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Dubious »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 1:09 am
Dubious wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 8:36 pm ...especially if "nothing" is all that is offered historically and evidentially. But for some hearsay is enough to create an acceptable truth where non exists which constitutes the entire meaning and modus of faith.
Or especially if there IS evidence, but certain people just refuse to listen...or even to open their eyes to what's around them. There's not a lot one can do with that sort of decision-not-to-know. Those who want not to know will simply get what they wish.
This describes what anyone would say who sees things others don't. It doesn't offer more than that.

So what do you see as EVIDENCE that most people no-longer see including the most recent historical and archeological data? It appears that Jesus in particular and god in general has been eroded from the mental landscape precisely because people have "opened their eyes to what's around them". The implication is that people no-longer have faith in the story in spite of faith not requiring evidence which in fact wouldn't be faith if it were so dependent.

So again what do you see as evidence which escapes the rest of us?

Merely asking for "some" of the evidence you seem to have beyond that provided by belief and faith alone!
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will vs Determinism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dubious wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 8:23 pm So what do you see as EVIDENCE that most people no-longer see including the most recent historical and archeological data? It appears that Jesus in particular and god in general has been eroded from the mental landscape precisely because people have "opened their eyes to what's around them".
What did you have in mind? Did something happen that specifically revealed to you that the Resurrection didn't actually take place? Do tell. Or do you simply mean that people no longer have any time or interest to think about God, because they're preoccupied with the business of modern life? Nietzsche thought that something like that was true. That was the essence of the famous "Madman's Speech." He said we'd "killed" God, not by actually disproving anything, but simply by becoming too modern and urbane to feel the need of God. But he did nothing to actually "kill" God. He just wanted to assume Him away. (Good luck with that, Friedrich :wink: ).
Merely asking for "some" of the evidence you seem to have beyond that provided by belief and faith alone!
Well, I already listed some of the historical evidence earlier. It's pretty good. Did you read that bit? I could offer you literary evidence, but that's pretty inductive, so you could decline it. I could offer you rational arguments, like the Cosmological, Moral and Teleological arguments, but they've all been done very well by others, and still some people still don't want to hear about it...

The personal evidence, evidence from one's own experience, the sort of thing thedoc was talking about...well, unfortunately for you, that's not transferrable. I can't make you have an experience, can I? You could ask God for that, but you'd have to have some willingness to receive it from Him too...

So where are we? We are at a point where it's reasonable for you to believe if you consider the evidence equitably. But it's also possible for you to choose not to.

It's almost as if God wants each person to make up his mind himself. I say that because it seems there's always enough evidence to make faith rational, but never quite enough to force it to be compulsory...

But then, I think that fits the Divine purpose admirably. His intention, as far as I understand it, is relationship. And that can only be had by free agents. You're free to choose to investigate, and free to choose to walk away...it looks like everything is as it should be.
Post Reply