There is no Hope without Jesus

[Nils]

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

OK, than please explain how it can occur without referring to God.

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.

Definitely not. Even mono-zygotic twins have no identical genes if I understand things correctly, Their environment is far from identical.

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 !

I have tried to explain this several times but you don’t comment, only repeating your argument.
Assume that you find convincing proof that there is no objective moral. Would you then argue that we shouldn’t try to stop theft? No, you would still argue that we have to stop criminals by threatening them with punishment.

#322 Post by PaulSacramento » Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:38 am
"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?"

Yes, “predisposed” I think means exactly “having nu choice”. That’s semantics, not philosophy.

Nils

[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?

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

Influenced? Or controlled. If everything in you and I are only influenced by heredity and environment that means we can still choose to act outside of those things. Unless everything in us are completely controlled by heredity and environment, our freewill remains intact. Do you agree?

[Kurieuo]

#322 Post by PaulSacramento » Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:38 am
"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?"

Yes, “predisposed” I think means exactly “having nu choice”. That’s semantics, not philosophy.

Predisposed means to "make someone liable or inclined to a specified attitude, action, or condition." There is no necessity to predispositions. For example, if I'm feeling angry then I might have a predisposition to vent kick the dog, (I'd not dare do such a thing! only because I have kids to do that to rather than a dog), but then if I did and the dog bit me then I'd only have myself to blame for being such an ass.

[PaulSacramento]

OK, than please explain how it can occur without referring to God.

So, it THAT the issue?
If so that is a simple one and has been addressed in various ways over the centuries.
Middle knowledge for example.
That God is outside Time means that choices we make in TIME are choice He knows in OUTSIDE of time.
Another view is that God knows every possible choice we can make ( not that hard really) so whatever choice we make, He knows and also knows all possible outcomes of course.

[PaulSacramento]

I have tried to explain this several times but you don’t comment, only repeating your argument.
Assume that you find convincing proof that there is no objective moral. Would you then argue that we shouldn’t try to stop theft? No, you would still argue that we have to stop criminals by threatening them with punishment

.

Objective morality exists in line with choice.
Without the ability to choose then morality ,any type, is illogical.
If there is no accountability, no responsibility ( which doesn't exist without free will), then there are no morals and as such no laws that are logical.

You seem to be stating that people should still be held accountable for actions they have no control over simply because they should.
Please explain why that should be.

[PaulSacramento]

Predisposed means to "make someone liable or inclined to a specified attitude, action, or condition." There is no necessity to predispositions. For example, if I'm feeling angry then I might have a predisposition to vent kick the dog, (I'd not dare do such a thing! only because I have kids to do that to rather than a dog), but then if I did and the dog bit me then I'd only have myself to blame for being such an ass.

I agree.
People are born with a a bunch of supposed predispositions and yet, we see many, everyday, overcoming them.
If there was no ability to choose AGAINST these predispositions, how could they?

[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

Influenced? Or controlled. If everything in you and I are only influenced by heredity and environment that means we can still choose to act outside of those things. Unless everything in us are completely controlled by heredity and environment, our freewill remains intact. Do you agree?

I really think that it should be clear what I mean. I wrote "influenced by hereity and environment (H&I) ... and nothing more". Earlier I talked about causation, that H&I is the cause to who you are.
I agree that if everything in us are completely controlled by H&I there is no free will. But I don'tn agree that if there is something else that also controls us then there is free will, for instance controlled by Randomness or God or Aliens. What else are you thinking of as an alternative to H&I?

But I understand that I shouldn't use the word "influence", it's too vague. On the other hand I think that "controlled" says too much. To me it suggests teleology. But this is a minor issue.

Nils

[Nils]

#322 Post by PaulSacramento » Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:38 am
"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?"

Yes, “predisposed” I think means exactly “having nu choice”. That’s semantics, not philosophy.

Predisposed means to "make someone liable or inclined to a specified attitude, action, or condition." There is no necessity to predispositions. For example, if I'm feeling angry then I might have a predisposition to vent kick the dog, (I'd not dare do such a thing! only because I have kids to do that to rather than a dog), but then if I did and the dog bit me then I'd only have myself to blame for being such an ass.

You are right, thanks
NIls

[Nils]

OK, than please explain how it can occur without referring to God.

So, it THAT the issue?
If so that is a simple one and has been addressed in various ways over the centuries.
Middle knowledge for example.
That God is outside Time means that choices we make in TIME are choice He knows in OUTSIDE of time.
Another view is that God knows every possible choice we can make ( not that hard really) so whatever choice we make, He knows and also knows all possible outcomes of course.

I asked for explanations without any reference to God. However, I don't understand your explanations that include God. Where does free will enter.
Nils

[Nils]

I have tried to explain this several times but you don’t comment, only repeating your argument.
Assume that you find convincing proof that there is no objective moral. Would you then argue that we shouldn’t try to stop theft? No, you would still argue that we have to stop criminals by threatening them with punishment

.

Objective morality exists in line with choice.
Without the ability to choose then morality ,any type, is illogical.
If there is no accountability, no responsibility ( which doesn't exist without free will), then there are no morals and as such no laws that are logical.

I asked earlier what kind of logic you refer to but I don't think that I got any answer.

You seem to be stating that people should still be held accountable for actions they have no control over simply because they should.
Please explain why that should be.

I have tried to explain several times, for instance 10 line above. You have never commented and you didn't answer my question above.

The general answer is pragmatism.

Nils.

[Kenny]

Influenced? Or controlled. If everything in you and I are only influenced by heredity and environment that means we can still choose to act outside of those things. Unless everything in us are completely controlled by heredity and environment, our freewill remains intact. Do you agree?

I really think that it should be clear what I mean. I wrote "influenced by hereity and environment (H&I) ... and nothing more". Earlier I talked about causation, that H&I is the cause to who you are.

Is Heredity and environment the same as “who we are”/us? If not, what’s the difference?

Ken

[1over137]

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

Well, if some post gets deleted the numbers in our posts will no longer correspond, I guess

[Kurieuo]

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

Well, if some post gets deleted the numbers in our posts will no longer correspond, I guess

Good point. What a great plugin. People can left-click the page number to copy a link. I see if there's a way to make the numbers remain, because deleting does seem to upset the numbering. Else us mods will need to be careful when deleting earlier posts.

[Nils]

Influenced? Or controlled. If everything in you and I are only influenced by heredity and environment that means we can still choose to act outside of those things. Unless everything in us are completely controlled by heredity and environment, our freewill remains intact. Do you agree?

I really think that it should be clear what I mean. I wrote "influenced by hereity and environment (H&I) ... and nothing more". Earlier I talked about causation, that H&I is the cause to who you are.

Is Heredity and environment the same as “who we are”/us? If not, what’s the difference?

Ken

Ken, I would say that H&E (and as ususal, maybe randomness) is the only cause of who we are.
Nils

[PaulSacramento]

OK, than please explain how it can occur without referring to God.

So, it THAT the issue?
If so that is a simple one and has been addressed in various ways over the centuries.
Middle knowledge for example.
That God is outside Time means that choices we make in TIME are choice He knows in OUTSIDE of time.
Another view is that God knows every possible choice we can make ( not that hard really) so whatever choice we make, He knows and also knows all possible outcomes of course.

I asked for explanations without any reference to God. However, I don't understand your explanations that include God. Where does free will enter.
Nils

Crap, I misread, sorry about that...