Free will — an investigation

[henry quirk]

Do you think this applies equally to everybody's causal chains that they are involved in?

Takin' into account natural differences between men, yep. So we can have conflict between men as each opposes the other.

Does this apply to the causal chains of other animals and plants, or only men?

If you mean to ask, can I monkey around with causal chains of plants and animals: obviously yes.

If you mean to ask, can plants and animals monkey around with causal chains: only persons can. There may be non-human persons. I've known a few dogs and cats and horses who sure as hell seemed to be persons.

[Belinda]

Do you think this applies equally to everybody's causal chains that they are involved in?

Takin' into account natural differences between men, yep. So we can have conflict between men as each opposes the other.

Does this apply to the causal chains of other animals and plants, or only men?

If you mean to ask, can I monkey around with causal chains of plants and animals: obviously yes.

If you mean to ask, can plants and animals monkey around with causal chains: only persons can. There may be non-human persons. I've known a few dogs and cats and horses who sure as hell seemed to be persons.

I meant "can plants and animals monkey around with causal chains". I cannot see how humans would be favoured with the power to originate when other animals don't have the power to originate.

I can accept that God can originate.

[henry quirk]

I cannot see how humans would be favoured with the power to originate when other animals don't have the power to originate.

Persons cause; persons are agents; persons are free wills; persons reason, imagine, intend.

Plants, and (most) animals are not free wills.

I can accept that God can originate.

Well, He's the First Cause, the Prime Mover, the Free Will.

[bobmax]

In other words, if we do or did have free will, what impact would it have on our real-world lives? What are its effects? And if we don't have free will, what does that mean, in terms of real-world consequences?

In my opinion the only consequence is about yourself.

The awareness that you have no free will grows in yourself.

This can lead to two different reactions in you:

- The rejection of this possibility for the horror it arouses.

- Or the birth of the hope of true freedom.

What is horror to the unfree man is delight to the truly free man.

[Belinda]

I cannot see how humans would be favoured with the power to originate when other animals don't have the power to originate.

Persons cause; persons are agents; persons are free wills; persons reason, imagine, intend.

Plants, and (most) animals are not free wills.

I can accept that God can originate.

Well, He's the First Cause, the Prime Mover, the Free Will.

Yes I agree. But persons as agents of change don't originate these changes. Persons are active and powerful as agents of change, but they don't absolutely originate changes. Only God originates and is not bound to causal chains . Causal chains are not terribly impressive, and are nothing more than how we explain how something happened.

[henry quirk]

But persons as agents of change don't originate these changes.

The hell they don't. And I said begin, end, and bend causal chains, not just change them.

Only God originates and is not bound to causal chains .

God is the First Cause, not the only cause.

Causal chains are not terribly impressive, and are nothing more than how we explain how something happened.

Causal chains are those natural (and willed) sequences of events leading to events leading to events, etc. There are innumerable chains all mixed together in a universe long & wide causal cable. Only free wills move as they will among those chains.

[Belinda]

But persons as agents of change don't originate these changes.

The hell they don't. And I said begin, end, and bend causal chains, not just change them.

Only God originates and is not bound to causal chains .

God is the First Cause, not the only cause.

Causal chains are not terribly impressive, and are nothing more than how we explain how something happened.

Causal chains are those natural (and willed) sequences of events leading to events leading to events, etc. There are innumerable chains all mixed together in a universe long & wide causal cable. Only free wills move as they will among those chains.

The key word is "innumerable". I mean we literally can't count the causal chains we know and infinity of them which we don't know, as you describe. What you call "free wills" I call reflection, self-restraint, reason, independence, defiance, vanity, or courage.

[Pattern-chaser]

Thanks to those who tried, with me, to have an actual discussion here, in this topic.

...
I see ego, anger, contempt and ill-will, personal insults, and so on.
...
More to the point, I see no philosophy.
...
I'm puzzled that the moderators here don't, er, moderate such behaviour.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Just because you made the CLAIM that you see 'such behavior', this does NOT mean 'such behavior' EXISTS. And, the FACT that you HAVE NOT and WILL NOT provide ANY supporting evidence for what you CLAIM to 'see', is just MORE supporting PROOF that what you 'see' does NOT even exist anyway.

Oh, and by the way, the reason WHY most posters are STILL HERE in this forum is because this IS a relatively 'free of speech' website. Just about ANY thing can be said and written and it will NOT be moderated.

I came to this forum hoping to find philosophical discussion. Having read Philosophy Now since its inception, I am disappointed in the almost-complete lack of philosophy, and discussion. Instead, there is conflict, abuse, argument by assertion, and other childishness. I've wasted my (very short) time here; I'm off to find some grown-ups to talk to about philosophy.

Fare well.

[Age]

Thanks to those who tried, with me, to have an actual discussion here, in this topic.

So, WHAT IS THE REASON WHY 'you' and 'them' FAILED to have actual discussion here?

...
I see ego, anger, contempt and ill-will, personal insults, and so on.
...
More to the point, I see no philosophy.
...
I'm puzzled that the moderators here don't, er, moderate such behaviour.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Just because you made the CLAIM that you see 'such behavior', this does NOT mean 'such behavior' EXISTS. And, the FACT that you HAVE NOT and WILL NOT provide ANY supporting evidence for what you CLAIM to 'see', is just MORE supporting PROOF that what you 'see' does NOT even exist anyway.

Oh, and by the way, the reason WHY most posters are STILL HERE in this forum is because this IS a relatively 'free of speech' website. Just about ANY thing can be said and written and it will NOT be moderated.

I came to this forum hoping to find philosophical discussion. Having read Philosophy Now since its inception, I am disappointed in the almost-complete lack of philosophy, and discussion. Instead, there is conflict, abuse, argument by assertion, and other childishness. I've wasted my (very short) time here; I'm off to find some grown-ups to talk to about philosophy.

Fare well.

So, which one is it, EXACTLY?

Did you want to find 'philosophical discussion', OR, did you want to talk 'about philosophy'?

What does the word 'philosophy' even mean, or refer to, to you, EXACTLY?

Oh, and by the way, 'you', so-called 'grown up adult human beings, have been discussing a lot of these discussions in this forum for millennia now, without ANY real success AT ALL. So, good luck in finding some 'grown-up' to talk to about 'philosophy'.

[Age]

Over the years, we have all seen many topics concerning free will. But one thing I have never seen — a clarification of what we mean by the concept of free will. That's what this topic is.

But this is not a definition-freak's topic, that demands a full, precise, and detailed definition, down to the last electron, before further discussion is permitted. Nothing so authoritarian!

This topic seeks to clarify free will. I have two questions to start with; you may have more to add?

1. What freedom(s) does free will bestow?

2. In contrast, what are the freedoms that free will does not, or cannot, bestow, if any?

In other words, if we do or did have free will, what impact would it have on our real-world lives? What are its effects? And if we don't have free will, what does that mean, in terms of real-world consequences?

So, you CLAIM that you have NEVER seen a CLARIFICATION of what 'we' mean by the concept of 'free will', (whoever the 'we' word refers to).

BUT, then you go STRAIGHT INTO asking questions, to START WITH, about;

1. What freedom/s does 'free will' bestow, AND,

2. What are the freedoms that 'free will' does NOT, or can NOT, bestow, if any?

WITHOUT even GAINING CLARIFICATION of what is meant by the term 'free will' FIRST.

Which all appears VERY CLUMSY and SELF-CONTRARY indeed.

When the term 'free will' means the ability to choose, then;

1. What freedom does 'free will' bestow, is the FREEDOM to CHOOSE. And,

2. 'Free will' does NOT provide the FREEDOM to CHOOSE from 'that knowledge/information', which has NOT YET been gathered and/or obtained.

The ability to choose, or just 'free will', is within human beings, and what impact that has on the so-called 'real-world' is that one can CHOOSE to either do 'one thing' or ANOTHER.

The 'effects' are the DIFFERENCE between what one ACTUALLY CHOOSES, to do, from what they COULD HAVE CHOSEN, to do. From ALL 'choices', what behavior THEN occurs is the 'effect' of 'free will'.

WHEN 'you', human beings, CHOOSE to do the Right 'thing/s' in Life, then how this WILL and DOES 'effect' the 'real-world' is the 'real-world' CHANGES from being ''this greedy, stressful, war-torn, and pollution-riddled world', in the days when this is being written, to 'the Peaceful and Harmonious world' in which 'you' ALL Truly WANT and DESIRE.

'you', human beings, DO HAVE 'free will', so there is NO more need to wonder or question if you do or do not.

[Age]

I am a free will.

SO, the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' IS 'a free will', correct?

Also, and although, when 'you' have been questioned about this previously, 'you' CLAIMED that 'I' am "henry quirk.

I am a point of causal & creative power. I begin, end, and bend at least some causal chains.

I am not a meat machine.

1. What freedom(s) does free will bestow?

As a free will: I can begin, end, and bend at least some causal chains.

Will you provide ANY examples of HOW and WHEN you BEGIN some causal chains, END some causal chains, AND BEND some causal chains?

If no, then WHY NOT?

Yesterday doesn't determine my today. I am free to attempt just about any damn thing I set my mind to, for any reason I suss out for myself.

So, if 'I' am 'free will' and that 'I' HAS 'my mind', then who HAS and OWNS 'mind' IS 'free will', correct?

If no, then WHY NOT?

Also, because that 'I' is, supposedly, 'free will', itself, then the 'freedom/s' that that 'I' bestows is upon 'itself' to 'begin', 'end', and 'bend' just SOME causal chains.

Why does that 'I' NOT bestow ABSOLUTE FREEDOM upon 'itself' to be able to 'begin', 'end', and 'bend' ALL causal chains.

WHY does that 'I' LIMIT 'itself' in this way, and NOT provide 'itself' with FULL 'freedom'?

2. In contrast, what are the freedoms that free will does not, or cannot, bestow, if any?

Bein' a free will only means I can try: it doesn't guarantee success or that my choices are wise or right.

That 'I', supposedly gave 'itself' the 'freedom' to 'begin', 'end', and 'bend' SOME things, but WHY NOT bestow upon, or give, itself the ability or freedom TO DO, instead of just TO TRY?

And, if that 'I', which is SUPPOSEDLY 'free will', 'itself', did NOT bestow 'itself' with the FREEDOM TO DO, then how FREE is 'free will', REALLY?

(I'm describin' myself as a libertarian agent [libertarian agent causation])

'you' are LIMITING what thee 'I' REALLY IS.

But this is just because what is being described is just 'that', which is coming from a VERY NARROWED and SHORT-SIGHTED field of view of things, and which is known here as "henry quirk".

[Age]

1. What freedom(s) does free will bestow?

As a free will: I can begin, end, and bend at least some causal chains.

OK, if we have free will, that seems perfectly reasonable, and useful, to me.

Were you NOT LISTENING?

"henry quirk" SAID, and CLAIMED, 'I' am 'free will'.

"henry quirk" did NOT SAY, 'we' HAVE 'free will'.

Yesterday doesn't determine my today...

...but yesterday does influence my today, surely?

OF COURSE IT DOES.

'you' AND "henry quirk" would NOT be HERE-NOW if it was NOT for what is called and referred to as, 'yesterday'.

I don't exist in isolation; I have a past; I have memories of things that have happened in that past. Without this 'tail' of history, I begin every day anew, with no discernable path or course previously established. My life becomes a succession of unconnected days, each one independent of all that came before. This doesn't seem to accord with the impressions I have of my real-world life. Have I misunderstood something?

2. In contrast, what are the freedoms that free will does not, or cannot, bestow, if any?

Bein' a free will only means I can try: it doesn't guarantee success or that my choices are wise or right.

This too seems reasonable to me.

[Age]

Have I misunderstood something?

Seems so. As I say, yesterday doesn't determine my today. Of course, yesterday influences and informs my today: but it doesn't determine my today.

LOL

'you' ARE 'you' TODAY, BECAUSE of 'yesterday'.

So, in other words, 'yesterday' CERTAINLY DETERMINED 'your' and EVERY "other's" 'today'.

'you' are LITERALLY the sum of the past experiences of 'that body', which 'you' are, or reside, WITHIN.

[Age]

This topic seeks to clarify free will. I have two questions to start with; you may have more to add?

1. What freedom(s) does free will bestow?

The power to make a choice. That is, a "will" not predetermined by prior impersonal forces.

What is the DIFFERENCE between 'personal forces' and 'impersonal forces'.

AND, IF God created EVERY thing, then the 'will', which you refer to here, WAS PREDETERMINED, by prior circumstances/situations. ALL caused and created by God, right?

2. In contrast, what are the freedoms that free will does not, or cannot, bestow, if any?

It doesn't "bestow" anything else.

'The power to make a choice', by the way, is for all intents and purposes, the SAME as 'the ability to choose'.

Unless, of course, one can show WHY NOT, 'otherwise'.

But 'this power' or 'this ability', to CHOOSE or to MAKE A CHOICE, 'was given' or has 'evolved', (depending on one's view of things), from pre-existing conditions. In other words, pre-determined factors have CAUSED, or CREATED, 'free will' to exist. Or, in more words, human beings have, or exist with, 'free will'.

It's not a promise of absolute freedom from influence, constraint or input from material facts.

'The power to make a choice', or 'the ability to choose', or 'free will', has absolutely NOTHING TO DO with influence, constraint, nor input from material things.

LOOK AT and LISTEN to the words, WHEN 'free will' means or refers to 'the ability to choose' or 'the power to make a choice', those words have NO bearing AT ALL on ANY thing else other than 'that power' or 'that ability'.

One has to choose either with, or in spite of such things.

This does NOT matter.

'Free will' is just 'the power' or 'the ability' (to choose/make a choice), ONLY.

It's not a promise that whatever anybody wants to be true will become true.

WHY bring the 'promise' word in here? And, WHY even bring ANY of this OTHER stuff in here?

It's not a guarantee that you cannot surrender your will, if you so choose. It's not a promise of "happiness" on your own terms, or lack of responsibility, or even freedom from oppressive forces and persons. It most certainly does not ever mean "without consequences"; free will presupposes that you will both choose and face those. Most of all, "free" must not be misrepresented as meaning, "total liberty." No such thing is ever available, nor is any such thing every implied. It only means that within the vicissitudes and circumstances of life, one has say as to what one does.

The 'free' word in the 'free will' term just refers to HAVING 'the power' or HAVING 'the ability'. One is absolutely FREE, to 'choose' or to 'make a choice'.

There is NO need to COMPLICATE ANY thing else further here.

One is ABSOLUTELY, TOTALLY FREE to 'make a choice'.

What one can 'choose from', however, IS LIMITED. BUT, this has NO bearing AT ALL on the Fact that one is ABSOLUTELY and TOTALLY FREE to 'choose'.

But it is also, as John Locke so clearly put it, premised on the reality God will hold each person accountable for his or her own choices, and that claiming, "I could not have done otherwise" will never work.

Well adding MORE and MORE UNNECESSARY 'stuff' into a discussion, which was SUPPOSEDLY started for CLARITY, is NOT the wisest of CHOICES, and SO, once again, 'you' WILL be HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

NOW, 'the reality that God will hold each person accountable for their OWN choices', contrary to POPULAR BELIEF, in the days when this was being written, does NOT relate to, NOR refer to, what happens to each person AFTER the body that they ARE WITHIN stops breathing and stops pumping blood, or "dies" as some of 'you' Wrongly call 'it'.

Because of that, free will makes morality possible, and moral accountability certain. So it implies, "Choose wisely."

'Heed your OWN advice', is another saying, ALSO, "immanuel can".

By the way, 'free will' does NOT make 'morality possible'.

Understanding, itself, makes 'morality, itself, an ACTUALITY.

'Free will' just provides and thus IS 'the ability to choose'.

And, ONLY WHEN one understands the DIFFERENCE between what IS Right and what IS Wrong in Life, then, and ONLY THEN, one can CHOOSE 'wisely', or 'correctly'. Until then 'you', human beings, WILL and DO carry on the way you have been.

[henry quirk]

I came to this forum hoping to find philosophical discussion. Having read Philosophy Now since its inception, I am disappointed in the almost-complete lack of philosophy, and discussion. Instead, there is conflict, abuse, argument by assertion, and other childishness. I've wasted my (very short) time here; I'm off to find some grown-ups to talk to about philosophy.

Fare well.

Well, no, this place isn't everyone's cup of tea. It's unruly (that's why I like it). No, there's not a lot of clean, direct philo-discussion, but, I think, there's a whole whack of raw philo-debate.

Anyway: good luck, PC...