What is Free Will?

[gasgod]

In a previous thread, I asked somebody to provide me with a non-circular definition of Free Will. Nobody obliged, perhaps because nobody read that post. So, I hereby repeat the challenge.

OK, let's suppose that I am a chessplayer with the white pieces. I know little about the English opening, so my choice is basically between e4 and d4. It seems to me that if you believe there is such a thing as Free Will, you must suppose that there is an entity known as "me" that can cause whatever firing pattern of neurons that will result in my picking up the e-pawn or d-pawn.

Now, if by Free Will you mean that the choice cannot be predicted because the initial conditions are too complex to analyze, then you have made a thoroughly trivial definition of Free Will. I don't think that this is what is meant by proponents of Free Will.

I think that Free Will proponents generally hold that my soul/mind/ego/spirit (take your pick) can make an unfettered choice regardless of the current pattern of neural firings in my brain.

However, it cannot be denied that my choice can be heavily influenced by the presence of various chemicals in my blood stream. Indeed, there are chemicals that render me unable to make any choice whatsoever. This leaves proponents of Free Will in the position of trying to explain how alcohol (to pick one chemical) can affect the manner in which my soul/mind/ego/spirit functions.

So, how can Free Will be defended?

GG

[udontknowmickey]

[ QUOTE ]


Now, if by Free Will you mean that the choice cannot be predicted because the initial conditions are too complex to analyze, then you have made a thoroughly trivial definition of Free Will. I don't think that this is what is meant by proponents of Free Will.

I think that Free Will proponents generally hold that my soul/mind/ego/spirit (take your pick) can make an unfettered choice regardless of the current pattern of neural firings in my brain.

However, it cannot be denied that my choice can be heavily influenced by the presence of various chemicals in my blood stream. Indeed, there are chemicals that render me unable to make any choice whatsoever. This leaves proponents of Free Will in the position of trying to explain how alcohol (to pick one chemical) can affect the manner in which my soul/mind/ego/spirit functions.

So, how can Free Will be defended?



[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe it can. I believe you are right on the money with this post.

[Little Fishy]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that if you believe there is such a thing as Free Will, you must suppose that there is an entity known as "me" that can cause whatever firing pattern of neurons that will result in my picking up the e-pawn or d-pawn.


[/ QUOTE ]

what if i consider that entity "me" to include those neurons to fire and tell your hand what to do? Free will exists from our current perpective, however it does not exist as anything but reducible complexity from the perspective of the future...

for instance in this current moment I am choosing what to type, however once i choose what to type i already made that choice and that choice was decided by "me". me encompassing all the events and experiences I've had as well as my pysical and metaphysical being. looking back on what I just typed I no longer poses the freedom to change what my choice had been. when confined within the context of continuous foreward moving time, free will only exists in those choices that have not yet been made... free will is something of the future not of the past.

does that work... it's just a stream of thoughts.

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that if you believe there is such a thing as Free Will, you must suppose that there is an entity known as "me" that can cause whatever firing pattern of neurons that will result in my picking up the e-pawn or d-pawn.


[/ QUOTE ]

what if i consider that entity "me" to include those neurons to fire and tell your hand what to do? Free will exists from our current perpective, however it does not exist as anything but reducible complexity from the perspective of the future...

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's what "me" is (neurons firing) then it seems to me that Free Will has bitten the dust. My decisions are the product of biochemistry, nothing more. How can this view support Free Will? Or are you perhaps agreeing that it doesn't?

GG

[Little Fishy]

i'm saying that free will only exists in the grey area of what we don't understand... actualy i'm not sure if that was what i was saying but it sounds good so let's roll with it...

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm saying that free will only exists in the grey area of what we don't understand... actualy i'm not sure if that was what i was saying but it sounds good so let's roll with it...

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me that if Free Will is a grey area, then Christianity, and most of organized religion is dubious.

GG

[udontknowmickey]

[ QUOTE ]


It seems to me that if Free Will is a grey area, then Christianity, and most of organized religion is dubious.



[/ QUOTE ]

I claim that Free Will does not exist and yet Christianity is true. (in fact, Christianity provides for why free will cannot, and does not exist)

These claims that I say are clear in the Bible (and can give proofs for) were espoused by Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and nowadays are supported by what people call Calvinists (an unfortunate term of a Biblical doctrine named after an individual).

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


It seems to me that if Free Will is a grey area, then Christianity, and most of organized religion is dubious.



[/ QUOTE ]

I claim that Free Will does not exist and yet Christianity is true. (in fact, Christianity provides for why free will cannot, and does not exist)

These claims that I say are clear in the Bible (and can give proofs for) were espoused by Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and nowadays are supported by what people call Calvinists (an unfortunate term of a Biblical doctrine named after an individual).

[/ QUOTE ]

If Christianity is true, yet Free Will false (or meaningless), how can one be saved? Is it just the luck of the draw? I find your outlook puzzling.

GG

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]

for instance in this current moment I am choosing what to type, however once i choose what to type i already made that choice and that choice was decided by "me". me encompassing all the events and experiences I've had as well as my pysical and metaphysical being. looking back on what I just typed I no longer poses the freedom to change what my choice had been. when confined within the context of continuous foreward moving time, free will only exists in those choices that have not yet been made... free will is something of the future not of the past.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are assuming that there is a past, a present, and a future. You are assuming there is a concept of time and that it moves. You are assuming you are actually making a decision. These may be very dubious assumptions.

[udontknowmickey]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]



It seems to me that if Free Will is a grey area, then Christianity, and most of organized religion is dubious.



[/ QUOTE ]



I claim that Free Will does not exist and yet Christianity is true. (in fact, Christianity provides for why free will cannot, and does not exist)

These claims that I say are clear in the Bible (and can give proofs for) were espoused by Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and nowadays are supported by what people call Calvinists (an unfortunate term of a Biblical doctrine named after an individual).



[/ QUOTE ]

If Christianity is true, yet Free Will false (or meaningless), how can one be saved? Is it just the luck of the draw? I find your outlook puzzling.

GG


[/ QUOTE ]

(btw has anyone figured a good mechanism for quoting quotes? I'm kind of annoyed that I need to keep typing in the "quote" things)

Calvinism (or, as some people prefer to call it: the Doctrines of Grace) is usually summed up in 5 points, which all fall under the heading of divine soveignty, aka God is in complete control of everything.

1) Total Depravity: Because of Adam's original sin (and ultimately because God decreed that history would play out this way) we are born with Adam's sin (and guilt) upon our heads. Because of that, we do not naturally seek God, and without His intervention we cannot seek God.

2) Unconditional Election: God chooses who is to go to heaven, as in who he will call, from before the begining of the world (and before anything has happened). Heaven is for those that God has foreordained to it and not for anything we do (or can do)

3) Limited Atonement: Christ has come to die for those God has choosen and His death on the cross is complete and wipes away the guilt and debt of sin that the elect owe to God (this of course means that those that Christ did not die for are still dead in their sins and forordained for destruction)

4) Irresistable Grace: Those that God has choosen for Heaven He has irresistably drawn towards Him. His calling cannot fail so those that He calls will come to Him and come to a saving knowledge of faith in Christ.

5) Perseverance of Saints: Since those that God has choosen are choosen without conditions (before the begining of the time) and God's calling and workings are irresistable and Christ's death is complete, true believers have an assurance of salvation that comes from a saving knowledge of Christ.

What this means for me as a Christian is that I have a firm belief that God is working all things for His Glory and nothing happens apart from His Will. It is a complete denial of "free will" in the sense that no one is free from God's purpose and design.

With regards to why I was choosen for heaven (and not hitler) the short and biblical answer is that it was for God's glory and of no reason of my own. I freely acknowledge that I am undeserving of His mercy and grace. Nothing I have done could possibly have earned what He has freely given me.

(btw, am I using choosen right? or is it chosen? I can never get those two figured out)

A good explanation of this (with proofs) is found in the Canons of Dordt.