Free Will (again)

I'm a little unclear on exactly what is considered in the confines of free will, because I have an example that should make it clear that we have free will, if this example is included in that definition.

So, would this count:

If I think of an abstract concept, like for example, free will, and then I post my thoughts about it on a philosophy forum. (Forgive the simplicity, its late.)
Is this action of posting my thoughts, about an abstract concept mind you, considered an action we can debate about? If so, I think it proves free will--at least to a certain extent. We would be free in our choices when they are governed by reason.

Let me give a better example: I come to the conclusion that God does not exist and thus there is no such thing as sin. I then proceed to the nearest house of pleasure and get my fill. Now it was my reasoning that motivated me to do what I did, and then I made a choice based on it. Before I reasoned this, I wouldn't have gone because it would've been against my values.

PS: When you forget to put the subject line in and just wrote a lot in a post, it is frustrating having to type it all over again. Perhaps something the webmaster should look into fixing.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little unclear on exactly what is considered in the confines of free will, because I have an example that should make it clear that we have free will, if this example is included in that definition.

So, would this count:

If I think of an abstract concept, like for example, free will, and then I post my thoughts about it on a philosophy forum. (Forgive the simplicity, its late.)
Is this action of posting my thoughts, about an abstract concept mind you, considered an action we can debate about? If so, I think it proves free will--at least to a certain extent. We would be free in our choices when they are governed by reason.

Let me give a better example: I come to the conclusion that God does not exist and thus there is no such thing as sin. I then proceed to the nearest house of pleasure and get my fill. Now it was my reasoning that motivated me to do what I did, and then I made a choice based on it. Before I reasoned this, I wouldn't have gone because it would've been against my values.

PS: When you forget to put the subject line in and just wrote a lot in a post, it is frustrating having to type it all over again. Perhaps something the webmaster should look into fixing.

[/ QUOTE ]I believe you are correct on the two main important accounts regarding freewill questions. All of your actions are determined untill you choose to reason for yourself. I'm surprised more people do not see this.

[bearly]

oh gosh, for the last 4 posters: has anyone read aristotle? how can we talk about free will until we have some concept or definition of the agent who is supposed to have this free will? "dimished capacity"? we have to nail down the "capacity" first. also, if anyone wants to see where all this can lead, read some works by (or a synopsis of)those who describe thenselves as epiphenomonologists. last: what in the world is "the moral tonality of man"?...........b

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
oh gosh, for the last 4 posters: has anyone read aristotle? how can we talk about free will until we have some concept or definition of the agent who is supposed to have this free will? "dimished capacity"? we have to nail down the "capacity" first. also, if anyone wants to see where all this can lead, read some works by (or a synopsis of)those who describe thenselves as epiphenomonologists. last: what in the world is "the moral tonality of man"?...........b

[/ QUOTE ]I have forgeten almost all of what I have read from aristole. But what I can remeber is that what aristole believed is most likely inadequate, he just didn't have the ammount of knowledge required yet.

[bearly]

oh my, that can be said for all of us. you missed the point: that is, aristotle clearly showed the need to start w/ a definition of "human", "moral agent" and the like. for discussions at the level of this forum that is all important to get all of us on "the same page" so to speak. if you are truly concerned w/ having "adequate knowledge" then ratchet this discussion up about 10 notches and go to subjects such as psycho-linguistics, phenomenology and conciousness,heck, just bring it up to the wittgenstein of the "investigations". you can't have it both ways: that is , decree what ammount of knowledge is too little, and also claim to know how much knowledge is enough............b

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
then ratchet this discussion up about 10 notches and go to subjects such as psycho-linguistics, phenomenology and conciousness,heck, just bring it up to the wittgenstein of the "investigations".

[/ QUOTE ] Go ahead if you wish. But why would you want to do that when it is easier to roll your eyes and damn at he same time the basicness as well as missing the basics of free will. But these barbs slung from a distance are best for your style. Please, forget I said anything, continue, just do not mind that I will ignore.

[bearly]

this is what happens when you try to be too clever. your response to my post was garbled, but i tried to interpret. i said if YOU are truly concerned..... i made it clear (unless quoted out of context) that i was content w/ the "basics", getting everyone on the same page and having a go at it. whichever way you or anyone chooses, my remarks were guided by an event which is unforgettable: a professor writing on a term thesis of mine, "who is right? who is wrong? philosophy is not a game you know". you refer to my "style". i will tell you what i told another poster who said nearly the same thing: if your idea of being helped is being spoon-fed, then i can't help you.................b

[carlo]

[ QUOTE ]
what in the world is "the moral tonality of man"?...........b

[/ QUOTE ]

Come out of yourself. Consider that morality and morals is not just the "thou shalt not" paradigm. You can certainly issue commandments as to what a man shall not do(not kill, not steal, not cheat,etc.) but the life of a man is also very much involved in WHAT HE DOES .

Each step along the way has it's own moral tone and each persons approach to life reveals a " moral tone poem" of being which reveals man in his noble nature. To live only in negative reenforcements(commandments,etc.) is debilitating and each man breaks into a morality which is NOT CHOICE but his own CREATION.

carlo

[atrifix]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this action of posting my thoughts, about an abstract concept mind you, considered an action we can debate about? If so, I think it proves free will--at least to a certain extent.

[/ QUOTE ]
It seems like you are just assuming the conclusion and begging the question, but maybe I misunderstood your example.

[ QUOTE ]
Now it was my reasoning that motivated me to do what I did, and then I made a choice based on it. Before I reasoned this, I wouldn't have gone because it would've been against my values.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure how this gets you to free will. Why did you reason the way you did?

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how this gets you to free will. Why did you reason the way you did?

[/ QUOTE ] Not only can your values be changed as was shown in the example, but so can your abilty to reason be changed and improved. How it gets to free will is a certain point one has the ability to accept or reject the percieved input. Freewill is what arises out of a infinte recursive loop in learning and percieving. When we examine a certain situation, we take different perspectives of the world and the try to see if it fits for the given situtation. When we find a good fit, we use that perspective. If the situation turns out the way we liked, we stenghten that perspective of the world that we used. And if it doesn't turn out the way we like we lessen our use of that perspective. We can control the perspectives we are able to use, and we can control the output that we would like to see, but only after, in most cases, we realize that we are being determined. At a certain point free-will and determinism becomes a chicken and egg game. People like to compare us to an advanced computer, but one difference between us and computers is the ability to choose the learning data, and disregard some learnt information because it to much work to make the changes that are required. The more you know about just how you are determined the more free-will you have. But don't worry there are alot of people who choose not to accept all that is required to actualy have free-will, because it is to difficult, instead they say it is an illusion. And they are of course right, it is to much work for not enough gain, if you are happy in your life, with your beliefs to change them, regardless if they are right or wrong.