There is no Hope without Jesus

[Kurieuo]

I'm quite enjoying the conversation between Kenny and Nils. I entirely get Nil's reasoning, and he is right sofaras I see, within a purely physical framework. Yet, I think this goes to show just how powerful our intuition is. Namely, the fact we do feel like we are responsible for our decisions and choices.

Despite our physical makeup and external surrounding influences, we still believe there is a "me" in there somewhere with a will that has an influence of its own. And, indeed, that is the way ALL of us act and behave, and we expect others to treat us in a personal manner. For example,we all become a little annoyed if people discard our opinion or don't respect our choices. If the treat us like we don't exist.

This issue isn't with Nil's logic, it is sound in modus ponens form which is:

1) If heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P), then we can’t influence our decisions i.e., there is no free will (Q).
2) Heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P). (if we accept we are physically determined)
3) Therefore, we can't influence our decisions (Q).

While I might use different language, this is quite a tight argument. However, like perhaps Kenny, I strongly believe the conclusion is wrong. Therefore, the modus tollens version is actually correct.

1) If heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P), then we can’t influence our decisions (Q).
2) We do influence our decisions. (¬Q) (based upon our own intrinsic first-hand experience and strong intuition of such)
3) Therefore, heredity and environment isn't all that is responsible for our decisions. (¬P)

The area in which Kenny is a little inconsistent, is with thinking he can accept both P and Q. Since he accepts we are physcially determined, and yet maintains we have free will, he needs to do a little explaining to those of us who find it very hard to see how the two can be made compatible.

[Kenny]

I'm quite enjoying the conversation between Kenny and Nils. I entirely get Nil's reasoning, and he is right sofaras I see, within a purely physical framework. Yet, I think this goes to show just how powerful our intuition is. Namely, the fact we do feel like we are responsible for our decisions and choices.

Despite our physical makeup and external surrounding influences, we still believe there is a "me" in there somewhere with a will that has an influence of its own. And, indeed, that is the way ALL of us act and behave, and we expect others to treat us in a personal manner. For example,we all become a little annoyed if people discard our opinion or don't respect our choices. If the treat us like we don't exist.

This issue isn't with Nil's logic, it is sound in modus ponens form which is:

1) If heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P), then we can’t influence our decisions i.e., there is no free will (Q).
2) Heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P). (if we accept we are physically determined)
3) Therefore, we can't influence our decisions (Q).

While I might use different language, this is quite a tight argument. However, like perhaps Kenny, I strongly believe the conclusion is wrong. Therefore, the modus tollens version is actually correct.

1) If heredity and environment is responsible for our decisions (P), then we can’t influence our decisions (Q).
2) We do influence our decisions. (¬Q) (based upon our own intrinsic first-hand experience and strong intuition of such)
3) Therefore, heredity and environment isn't all that is responsible for our decisions. (¬P)

The area in which Kenny is a little inconsistent, is with thinking he can accept both P and Q. Since he accepts we are physcially determined, and yet maintains we have free will, he needs to do a little explaining to those of us who find it very hard to see how the two can be made compatible.

I don't believe heredity and environment is responsible for our actions. Heredity and environment may be a small part of who we are, so it may influence our actions, but it definitely doesn't dictate or determine our actions.

[Nils]

Nils,

It seems to me, that you're making free will into something it isn't. You're making it more complicated than it really is.

Free will is simply the ability to choose from among any possible choices.

Rick,
yes, but the crucial question is what you mean by “possible” and that depends on which perspective you put it into. Suppose that I ask you if I shall buy you a fruit in the new supermarket. The internal perspective: You think that they only have apples and oranges so there are only two possible alternatives. In an external perspective: I know that they have ten different fruits, so ten are possible. In another external perspective: I know that you think that there are only two fruits and I know that you don’t like apples so there is only one possible alternative. As you can’t change your tastes for fruits you have no alternatives. To generalise that perspective: If absolutely everything about you is known, it is also known what you will decide in any situation and that there is no possible alternative/choice, i.e. that you have no free will. (There may be randomness but that doesn’t add to free will).

I think the free will issue is complex.

Nils

[PaulSacramento]

Free will is only complex when you look for ways to circumvent it.


Kenny original example is spot on and why people that really look into free will believe that there is free will.

If all we are are by-products of our environment or genes then people raised the same way, exposed to the same environments, would choose the same choice and they do NOT.

Look, they are certain behaviors and choices that are predictable, simply because choices are finite and people can be predictable.
None of that means that people don't freely choose and by that I mean make the decision to choose A instead of B for WHATEVER reason.

If there was truly NO free will and a person has NO CHOICE in what they decide how on earth would you ever hold anyone accountable for their actions from a logical perspective?
Why hold a thief accountable for stealing when he had no choice BUT to steal ?
There was NO CHOICE but for that person to steal, they have no other alternative !

[PaulSacramento]

You seem to assume that some horrifying consequence would come out of my view. Please explain. My view, even if totally accepted, would result only in small changes in the criminal systems in at least Norway and Sweden (I don't know the criminal systems of the other Nordic countries). Regarding Norway read about Anders Behring Breivik on Wikipedia.

Norway and Sweden had established legal systems that allowed for these changes, they had a core of accountability ( and this won't work out for hem anyways).

You view equals no accountability and if you don't understand the consequences of that, well...

Subjective morality was the core of communist grimes in the 20th century, enough said.

[Kenny]

Nils,

It seems to me, that you're making free will into something it isn't. You're making it more complicated than it really is.

Free will is simply the ability to choose from among any possible choices.

Rick,
yes, but the crucial question is what you mean by “possible” and that depends on which perspective you put it into. Suppose that I ask you if I shall buy you a fruit in the new supermarket. The internal perspective: You think that they only have apples and oranges so there are only two possible alternatives. In an external perspective: I know that they have ten different fruits, so ten are possible. In another external perspective: I know that you think that there are only two fruits and I know that you don’t like apples so there is only one possible alternative. As you can’t change your tastes for fruits you have no alternatives. To generalise that perspective: If absolutely everything about you is known, it is also known what you will decide in any situation and that there is no possible alternative/choice, i.e. that you have no free will. (There may be randomness but that doesn’t add to free will).

I think the free will issue is complex.

Nils

Using your scenario, even if he doesn't like apples, he still has the option to choose an apple even if you know he will not; thus free will.

[PaulSacramento]

I think that Nils believes that if he is predisposed to certain choices that, somehow, that means he has NO CHOICE in what he chooses.
Is that correct Nils?

[Nils]

Ken,
I said, in #311
“Ken, perhaps I was unclear. Assuming a materialistic world view, what affects you is heredity and environment and that is all that affects you, including your inner states, desires, beliefs, preferences, views, decisions etc. Immediately after conception you are affected by your genes only but soon the environment will be as important. From that point on everything in you is due to heredity and environment including all aspects of you, the “within” and your will, directly or, mostly, indirectly. There never emerges a You that is uninfluenced by heredity and environment (or maybe some randomness).
If you are a theist just add God as part of the environment. “
You answered, in #312
“Heredity and environment is a part of who I am. If heredity and environment is responsible for my decisions, that's the same as saying I am responsible for my decisions. Sorta like saying; my legs gets me from point A to point B”
and in #315
“Heredity and environment are only 2 of countless things that I am, that contributes to (not determine) the decisions I make. At the end of the day, what I decide to do comes from within; not an outside source.
and in #317
“I don't believe heredity and environment is responsible for our actions. Heredity and environment may be a small part of who we are, so it may influence our actions, but it definitely doesn't dictate or determine our actions.

In #311 I tried to explain my view on causality. The way we are is caused is by heredity and environment ( and perhaps God). That means that our complete inner life, from conception up till now, depends exclusively on these causes. You apparently think otherwise but you don’t explain how, when and where those other “countless things” come to existence within you. Things that according to you have never been influenced by heredity and environment.
In #315 you seem to think that environment is only influencing us from outside. This is a misunderstanding. Your inside mental states are greatly influenced by earlier environmental circumstances so environment is working indirectly, also from inside.
Nils

[RickD]

Holy crap!

I just noticed that the posts are numbered!

Kurieuo,


Nice job!

[Kenny]

Ken,
I said, in #311
“Ken, perhaps I was unclear. Assuming a materialistic world view, what affects you is heredity and environment and that is all that affects you, including your inner states, desires, beliefs, preferences, views, decisions etc. Immediately after conception you are affected by your genes only but soon the environment will be as important. From that point on everything in you is due to heredity and environment including all aspects of you, the “within” and your will, directly or, mostly, indirectly. There never emerges a You that is uninfluenced by heredity and environment (or maybe some randomness).
If you are a theist just add God as part of the environment. “
You answered, in #312
“Heredity and environment is a part of who I am. If heredity and environment is responsible for my decisions, that's the same as saying I am responsible for my decisions. Sorta like saying; my legs gets me from point A to point B”
and in #315
“Heredity and environment are only 2 of countless things that I am, that contributes to (not determine) the decisions I make. At the end of the day, what I decide to do comes from within; not an outside source.
and in #317
“I don't believe heredity and environment is responsible for our actions. Heredity and environment may be a small part of who we are, so it may influence our actions, but it definitely doesn't dictate or determine our actions.

In #311 I tried to explain my view on causality. The way we are is caused is by heredity and environment ( and perhaps God). That means that our complete inner life, from conception up till now, depends exclusively on these causes. You apparently think otherwise but you don’t explain how, when and where those other “countless things” come to existence within you. Things that according to you have never been influenced by heredity and environment.
In #315 you seem to think that environment is only influencing us from outside. This is a misunderstanding. Your inside mental states are greatly influenced by earlier environmental circumstances so environment is working indirectly, also from inside.
Nils

So if I understand you correctly, I am influenced by my heredity and environment, which I agree with. Is it also your opinion that all that we are is just heredity and environment? Or do you believe we are more than that?

[Kurieuo]

Holy crap!

I just noticed that the posts are numbered!

Kurieuo,


Nice job!

I did it for Audie. She always asked for it, and now she no longer seems to be posting I thought it was the right time to add the post numbering extension.

[Nessa]

Holy crap!

I just noticed that the posts are numbered!

Kurieuo,


Nice job!

I did it for Audie. She always asked for it, and now she no longer seems to be posting I thought it was the right time to add the post numbering extension.

if only you had done it sooner she might still be here

[Nils]

Holy crap!

I just noticed that the posts are numbered!

Kurieuo,


Nice job!

I did it for Audie. She always asked for it, and now she no longer seems to be posting I thought it was the right time to add the post numbering extension.

Excellent.
And that I also have asked for didn't stop you!
Nils

[Nils]

Kurieuo,
your two last posts, #301 and #316 are interesting, especially your reference to intuition. I’ll come back to that later on.
(Nice with post numbering!)
Nils

[Nils]

Ken,
I said, in #311
“Ken, perhaps I was unclear. Assuming a materialistic world view, what affects you is heredity and environment and that is all that affects you, including your inner states, desires, beliefs, preferences, views, decisions etc. Immediately after conception you are affected by your genes only but soon the environment will be as important. From that point on everything in you is due to heredity and environment including all aspects of you, the “within” and your will, directly or, mostly, indirectly. There never emerges a You that is uninfluenced by heredity and environment (or maybe some randomness).
If you are a theist just add God as part of the environment. “
You answered, in #312
“Heredity and environment is a part of who I am. If heredity and environment is responsible for my decisions, that's the same as saying I am responsible for my decisions. Sorta like saying; my legs gets me from point A to point B”
and in #315
“Heredity and environment are only 2 of countless things that I am, that contributes to (not determine) the decisions I make. At the end of the day, what I decide to do comes from within; not an outside source.
and in #317
“I don't believe heredity and environment is responsible for our actions. Heredity and environment may be a small part of who we are, so it may influence our actions, but it definitely doesn't dictate or determine our actions.

In #311 I tried to explain my view on causality. The way we are is caused is by heredity and environment ( and perhaps God). That means that our complete inner life, from conception up till now, depends exclusively on these causes. You apparently think otherwise but you don’t explain how, when and where those other “countless things” come to existence within you. Things that according to you have never been influenced by heredity and environment.
In #315 you seem to think that environment is only influencing us from outside. This is a misunderstanding. Your inside mental states are greatly influenced by earlier environmental circumstances so environment is working indirectly, also from inside.
Nils

So if I understand you correctly, I am influenced by my heredity and environment, which I agree with. Is it also your opinion that all that we are is just heredity and environment? Or do you believe we are more than that?

I hoped that #311, cited above, was clear. Yes, everything in you and I are influenced by heredity and environment, from conception onwards. That and nothing else (besides randomness, possibly). That's my opinion. '
If you belive in God, he also influences, but that doesn't give you free will (even if some think so). If anyone is interested I can explain.

Nils