Could something whose existence depends on something else be free?

[Age]

Is free speech possible if our actions, including speech, are determined by forces beyond our control?
Is religious freedom possible if our actions, including our beliefs, are determined by forces beyond our control?
Is there any freedom if our actions are determined by forces outside of our control?
Some of us like to say that we live in a free society, but in which way are we truly free?

By free I mean the ability to choose between available options.

In your view, does free "mean the ability to choose between available options" even when those choices are determined by forces beyond our control?

To me, Yes.

[Age]

Is free speech possible if our actions, including speech, are determined by forces beyond our control?
Is religious freedom possible if our actions, including our beliefs, are determined by forces beyond our control?
Is there any freedom if our actions are determined by forces outside of our control?
Some of us like to say that we live in a free society, but in which way are we truly free?

By free I mean the ability to choose between available options.

In your view, does free "mean the ability to choose between available options" even when those choices are determined by forces beyond our control?

To me, Yes.

[Age]

By free I mean the ability to choose between available options.

In your view, does free "mean the ability to choose between available options" even when those choices are determined by forces beyond our control?

You are still free even if you are forced to do the opposite of what you like. I also forget a word in the definition of free: the ability to choose between available options unimpeded.

What do you mean by 'unimpeded' here?

[Age]

Freedom is unrestricted choice, maybe, as reactive creatures the one thing which is not conceivable is an organism not reacting to its environment, for that is the organism's basic nature.

But still having 'unrestricted choice' IS EXACTLY what human beings do have. They, however, do have a limited number of things to choose FROM.

These may appear as being the SAME but they are NOT.

[Age]

You are still free even if you are forced to do the opposite of what you like.

Imagine being held at gunpoint and forced to open a safe. It might seem like you have no choice but to do what the gunman says. However, if you think about it, your brain is still making a choice. In this situation, the best option is to open the safe to avoid getting hurt.

So, even though it may not be a choice you want to make because you would have preferred not to be in that situation, it's the best choice for you in that moment.

When you make decisions and take actions, your brain is constantly processing information to figure out the best course of action. This means that our choices are not based on some mystical free will, [/quote]

you KEEP MISSING what KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT to you here.

but instead a result of our brains calculating what is best for us in a given situation.

you are CONFLATING here what does NOT need to be.

If anything is "forced" on us, it is our brain's calculation of what the optimal course of action is.

OBVIOUSLY if some 'thing' is being 'forced', then that 'thing' is NOT 'free'.

[BigMike]

You are still free even if you are forced to do the opposite of what you like.

Imagine being held at gunpoint and forced to open a safe. It might seem like you have no choice but to do what the gunman says. However, if you think about it, your brain is still making a choice. In this situation, the best option is to open the safe to avoid getting hurt. So, even though it may not be a choice you want to make because you would have preferred not to be in that situation, it's the best choice for you in that moment.

When you make decisions and take actions, your brain is constantly processing information to figure out the best course of action. This means that our choices are not based on some mystical free will,

you KEEP MISSING what KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT to you here.

And what exactly "KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT" to me here?

[bahman]

You are still free even if you are forced to do the opposite of what you like.

Imagine being held at gunpoint and forced to open a safe. It might seem like you have no choice but to do what the gunman says. However, if you think about it, your brain is still making a choice. In this situation, the best option is to open the safe to avoid getting hurt. So, even though it may not be a choice you want to make because you would have preferred not to be in that situation, it's the best choice for you in that moment.

When you make decisions and take actions, your brain is constantly processing information to figure out the best course of action. This means that our choices are not based on some mystical free will, but instead a result of our brains calculating what is best for us in a given situation. If anything is "forced" on us, it is our brain's calculation of what the optimal course of action is.

You are still free. The other option does not just evaporate. You know that the other option exists and you can choose it.

[bahman]

In your view, does free "mean the ability to choose between available options" even when those choices are determined by forces beyond our control?

You are still free even if you are forced to do the opposite of what you like. I also forget a word in the definition of free: the ability to choose between available options unimpeded.

What do you mean by 'unimpeded' here?

Not obstructed or hindered.

[popeye1945]

There are no such thing as independent existences and interdependence rules out freedom.

[Age]

Imagine being held at gunpoint and forced to open a safe. It might seem like you have no choice but to do what the gunman says. However, if you think about it, your brain is still making a choice. In this situation, the best option is to open the safe to avoid getting hurt. So, even though it may not be a choice you want to make because you would have preferred not to be in that situation, it's the best choice for you in that moment.

When you make decisions and take actions, your brain is constantly processing information to figure out the best course of action. This means that our choices are not based on some mystical free will,

you KEEP MISSING what KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT to you here.

And what exactly "KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT" to me here?

That what you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH bor WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.

[popeye1945]

you KEEP MISSING what KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT to you here.

And what exactly "KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT" to me here?

That what you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH bor WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.

Truth/fact is experience-dependent but is not infallible, meaning it sometimes disagrees with physical reality. This is true whether it is individual truth/fact or truth of the group or collective judgment. What is actually true as fact, is often not believed; if it does not agree with one's perception or preconceived bias.

[Age]

And what exactly "KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT" to me here?

That what you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH bor WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.

Truth/fact is experience-dependent and is not infallible,

Is what you just said and claimed here also fallible?

If yes, then maybe you would like to reconsider YOUR CLAIM here.

Or, are you 'trying to' CLAIM that what you just said and claimed here is infallible?

If yes, then I really hope you can SEE the CONTRADICTION and HYPOCRISY here.

meaning it sometimes disagrees with physical reality.

AND, what IS the 'truth/fact' of or about 'physical reality' based on, EXACTLY, if NOT 'dependent upon experience'?

Also, HOW would one EVER KNOW if expressed 'truths/facts' AGREED with 'physical reality', or NOT?

And, what about 'non-physical reality', does that even exist?

This is true whether it is individual truth/fact or truth of the group or collective judgment.

BUT, you just got through TELLING us that 'truth/fact' is 'experience-dependent' and is NOT infallible. So, HOW do we KNOW that what you say 'is true', which IS 'experience-dependent' upon YOUR OWN past 'experience' is NOT infallible ALSO?

What is actually true as fact, is often not believed; if it does not agree with one's perception or preconceived bias.

But what IS ACTUALLY true as fact?

Will you provide some examples?

And, what, EXACTLY, makes up 'what IS ACTUALLY true as fact'?

[BigMike]

And what exactly "KEEPS BEING POINTED OUT" to me here?

That what you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH bor WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.

Truth/fact is experience-dependent but is not infallible, meaning it sometimes disagrees with physical reality. This is true whether it is individual truth/fact or truth of the group or collective judgment. What is actually true as fact, is often not believed; if it does not agree with one's perception or preconceived bias.

That statement is partially correct in that individuals and groups have subjective experiences and biases that can influence their perceptions of truth or facts. However, the suggestion that truth or fact can sometimes disagree with physical reality is not accurate.

Truth and facts are based on evidence and empirical data that can be observed, measured, and tested. They are not dependent on individual or group experiences or biases. Physical reality, as it exists, is a fundamental aspect of objective truth and fact.

Furthermore, while people may not believe what is actually true because of their biases, that does not mean that truth and fact are not objectively verifiable. Scientific method and logical reasoning can help to eliminate individual biases and provide a more accurate representation of reality.

The statement confuses subjective perceptions of truth with objective truth and fact. While individuals and groups may have different experiences and biases that influence their understanding of the world, objective reality remains unchanged, and truth and fact can be established through empirical evidence and logical reasoning.

[popeye1945]

What you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH or WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.
Truth/fact is experience-dependent and is not infallible,

Is what you just said and claimed here also fallible? If yes, then maybe you would like to reconsider YOUR CLAIM here. [/quote]

The first stage of the process of discernment is perception, and if perception is faulty due to one's biology, the correction of that judgement is also experience/perception dependent. Biology is the measure and meaning of all things. "To error is to be human." A collective subjective judgement of an experience is somewhat more likely to be correct, but again, even the collective judgment is not infallible. Despite the dangers, we trust, as we must, our own perceptions in general, as not to do so would mean to be frozen in indecision, and unable to function properly in the world.



Or, are you 'trying to' CLAIM that what you just said and claimed here is infallible?
If yes, then I really hope you can SEE the CONTRADICTION and HYPOCRISY here.

meaning it sometimes disagrees with physical reality.

You are I believe misreading; I stated the perception/experience and judgment are NOT infallible. Meaning they are all subject to human error.


AND, what IS the 'truth/fact' of or about 'physical reality' based on, EXACTLY, if NOT 'dependent upon experience'?
Also, HOW would one EVER KNOW if expressed 'truths/facts' AGREED with 'physical reality', or NOT?
And, what about 'non-physical reality', does that even exist? [/quote]

Physical reality is what biology tells you it is, but again this is NOT perfect, in the cases of delusion, the delusion may be due to the limitations or malfunctions of said biology whether that be perception or judgment.

This is true whether it is individual truth/fact or truth of the group or collective judgment.

BUT, you just got through TELLING us that 'truth/fact' is 'experience-dependent' and is NOT infallible. So, HOW do we KNOW that what you say 'is true', which IS 'experience-dependent' upon YOUR OWN past 'experience' is NOT infallible ALSO?

What is actually true as fact, is often not believed; if it does not agree with one's perception or preconceived bias.

Not infallible means subject to error.


But what IS ACTUALLY true as fact?
Will you provide some examples?
And, what, EXACTLY, makes up 'what IS ACTUALLY true as fact'?
[/quote]

What is actually true as a fact is, that one's perception/experience and judgment coincide with physical reality.

I am a little puzzled here, you have questioned absolutely everything stated and while it might be good for me to sharpen my thoughts in answering every detail; it makes me wonder if you understood anything from the original post.

[popeye1945]

That what you BELIEVE is true does NOT FIT IN WITH bor WORK IN WITH what is ACTUALLY True.

Truth/fact is experience-dependent but is not infallible, meaning it sometimes disagrees with physical reality. This is true whether it is individual truth/fact or truth of the group or collective judgment. What is actually true as fact, is often not believed; if it does not agree with one's perception or preconceived bias.

That statement is partially correct in that individuals and groups have subjective experiences and biases that can influence their perceptions of truth or facts. However, the suggestion that truth or fact can sometimes disagree with physical reality is not accurate.

Yes well, I failed to make myself clear, perception that is taken for truth/fact sometimes does not agree with physical reality but the only way to know this is through perception, experience and judgment to correct the error.

Truth and facts are based on evidence and empirical data that can be observed, measured, and tested. They are not dependent on individual or group experiences or biases. Physical reality, as it exists, is a fundamental aspect of objective truth and fact. {/quote]

Ultimately truth/fact is necessarily determined by the only means available to us and that is the judgment of perceptions by whatever means this is accomplished, be it observation, measurement, or testing all these things must be perceived and judged on a conscious subjective level. As I have stated elsewhere, consciousness/biology is the measure and meaning of all things; indeed, even apparent reality as a physically object field are manifestations of the biological body in reaction to the energies that surround us.

Furthermore, while people may not believe what is actually true because of their biases, that does not mean that truth and fact are not objectively verifiable. Scientific methods and logical reasoning can help to eliminate individual biases and provide a more accurate representation of reality. [/quote]

One cannot escape subjective consciousness as the perceiver/experiencer that judges and measures all things. What you are talking about is an educated authority, a collective consciousness that is the collective measure and meaning of all things. Multiple subjective consciousnesses. To the individual truth is experience, to the group it is agreement.


The statement confuses subjective perceptions of truth with objective truth and fact. While individuals and groups may have different experiences and biases that influence their understanding of the world, objective reality remains unchanged, and truth and fact can be established through empirical evidence and logical reasoning. [/quote]

In our apparent reality all things/objects, the physical world is biologically dependent, and the meaning of all things is dependent upon biological interpretations of the energies in play; as they affect the bodies of conscious subjects. Just as there is no sound and there is no color in the physical world, so too are there no objects, objects are a biological readout of those same said energies. All objects and their qualities have their meanings in biological reactions. Cold, heat, soft, hard, damp or dry objects are what they are relative to biology, hard is to a soft body.