Free Will

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1420443994823.jpg (58.31 KB, 540x721, 540:721, 1417120289165.jpg)

Free Will 01/05/15 (Mon) 07:46:34 No.16582

Noticed that philosophy is a valid topic on /fringe/. Wanted to see what you guys think about free will.

Do you think your average person in a first world country has free will?

I recently started thinking about this after seeing a quote that basically stated: "All of our decisions about, as well as the information we may gain from, and opinions we may form about a given situation, piece of media, or passage of information will in turn be affected by what information we have at our disposal and what opinions we already hold." I'm paraphrasing here because I didn't really give it any heed at the time and can't remember where I saw it.

From that I basically take that who you are and all of your decisions are dictated by what information you had and what opinions you held at the start of this feedback loop (the point where you started to think for yourself). As obviously if you change the starting conditions of any chaotic system you are going to cause massive changes at all points further on in the system.

I think this suggests free will is an illusion, what do you think?

01/05/15 (Mon) 07:58:07 No.16587

To put it simple: if we didn't have free will, we wouldn't be self-conscious.

The thing is that most of the time we just act instinctively.

01/05/15 (Mon) 08:36:24 No.16597

I ascribe to what Montalk says about Freewill and what the Kybalion also says about it.

Matter on the one end of the scale manifests practically no freewill. Spirit on the other end has absolute freewill. Various entities in-between these extremes of the scale having increasingly more freewill as they rise up in the scale.

I also would like to say that anyone who says causality invalidates freewill needs to into comptabilism. How is a random choice anymore of a "freewill" choice than a choice made because of a previous cause?

01/05/15 (Mon) 08:37:48 No.16598

>>16597
Ah fuck should have used this flag or the Kybalion flag.

01/05/15 (Mon) 08:52:04 No.16601

>>16597
I understand that causality does not invalidate free will. The point is we do not have control over the base conditions that determine what choices we will make.

As an example, imagine you were born under the same circumstances but with some minor changes to the information you had access to and opinions you held when you were young.

It is likely you would be a very different person from the person you are now.

It is likely this "you" would hold some opinions you would disagree with.

Doesn't the mere fact this person could conceivably exist instead of you suggest you don't have free will? You don't get to decide who you become, randomness and happenstance does.

01/05/15 (Mon) 09:25:56 No.16604

>>16601
>Doesn't the mere fact this person could conceivably exist instead of you suggest you don't have free will?

No it does not.

>You don't get to decide who you become, randomness and happenstance does.

You have a misunderstanding of what constitutes the self.

01/05/15 (Mon) 11:46:01 No.16613

nobody has any

01/05/15 (Mon) 12:43:54 No.16623

>>16582
I'm not sure. i am relatively sure all people have free will and probably many if not most animals.

I think it's entirely plausible the degree of free will between individuals may be variable. Some people more in control of their actions than others.

>>16587
This. if all our actions were based on deterministic physical laws. Than a conscious person would be unnecessary. Which leads to the conclusion either consciousness originates somewhere separately from currently understood scientific maxims / sequential logic.

Although the only proof I have of anyone being conscious and not a philosophical zombie is the I think therefor I am. So it makes the first part of my response just speculation. i suppose it is possible everyone but myself is simply an unconscious automaton simulating conscious actions, however this would seem to be a detrimental and wasteful evolutionary adaption, so it seems unlikely.

01/05/15 (Mon) 12:49:40 No.16624

>>16582
I would say that Free Will is a possible trait among humans and not an intrinsic one. Will is something that must be developed and exercised consciously for it to have the strength to subjugate your desires instead of being subjugated by them. This means that very few people actually have "free" will as the complete subjugation of desire is a very advanced occult practice.

However this does not mean that people are incapable of progress, as complete subjugation of the will by desire would imply. This progress is evident in many, though usually in small ways, and is due to the fact that the subjugation of will is not complete in most and will has some leverage to compete against and even change certain desires so that they are more in line with the will of the individual.

TL;DR It's a dual system where both parts have fluctuating strength and compete against each other

01/05/15 (Mon) 16:07:45 No.16638

free will is my penis

01/05/15 (Mon) 22:53:58 No.16678

>>16597
I want to add to this that spirit is what puts matter into form. If matter is the mother, spirit is the father.

Matter => pattern

>>16601
>You don't get to decide who you become, randomness and happenstance does.

This is just karmic entanglement. If you opt out of it or transform it, you get "free will."

As >>16624 suggests, a "dual system" is a great way to describe it, but I'd like to elaborate on a slightly different way I think of it:

You have absolute free will but once you incarnate (accepting the laws of the physical) and over time you voluntarily subjugate it to outside things like education, media, the tenets of religious dogma, et cetera you are shaped into an "individual" with an ego.

Your free will is there, but your mind has been conditioned to pretend like it isn't and that it is somehow normal or better that way.

Most of us have free will, some of us just haven't chosen to remember it.