• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Free will vs. Determinism

my argument for the existence of free will is simple:

i don't think consciousness would exist in a world without free will.

seems to me that the odds of consciousness arising within a purely deterministic universe would be slim to none.
 
just two of the issues with that:
- what if consciousness is an illusion.
- as for probability, with enough time, slim to none improbability can become merely unlikely, possibility and in some cases certainty.
 
Most likely we live in a deterministic universe where our Free Will is nothing more than an answer preceding choice.

But determinism sucks as a way of structured thought. "I stole because of my rearing in the environment" and so forth.
*This is why I like the Christian doctrine of Free Will (even though it's contested amongst theologians).
"No, you stole because you're a sinner. You must atone for what you have done and do better".
 
thenightwatch said:
my consciousness is the only thing in existence that i am sure is not an illusion -- cogito ergo sum
Click to expand...

Brain in a vat. For all you know you could be a simulation and thus your consciousness is nothing but a programmed illusion.
Determinism.
 
the "brain in a vat" argument is actually part of the larger "i think therefore i am" line of thought

even if i am just a brain in a vat, i still am experiencing something therefore i must exist (even if everything else about my existence is a lie)

i don't believe that the existence of consciousness is absolute proof that free will exists, but IMO it definitely implies free will
 
Ah but my argument wasn't "You do not exist physically"
Rather, your conscious may be a derived schema of stimulus which makes the whole "I think" part of Descartes a bit troubling. The words "I am" have been around since the dawn of religion <3
 
right, i do concede that free will might not exist. in all likelihood, we will never know for sure. but of the two possibilities, determinism seems to me to be far more bizarre and unlikely.

if free will exists, though, then that also implies that there is a higher power in the universe than just the laws of science. which is sorta scary.
 
even belief in a higher power doesn't necessarily lead to belief that free will exists, though.

two of my idols, Albert Einstein and Kurt Godel, used to argue about the existence of Free Will. both men believed in God, but Albert Einstein did not believe in Free Will or random chance. "God does not play dice with the universe." he claimed. to him, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle was just a lack of understanding of the larger rules. Kurt Godel, though, vehemently believed in Free Will...
 
I do not believe in a higher power (unless you count yourself)*. I believe in Free Will simply for the structured thought, the philosophy. Determinism to me answers little. I believe in Free Will for the sake of responsibility.

*Buddhists (etc)
 
"higher power" in the context i intended doesn't necessarily mean "God"... just that there might be something more going on in the universe than science can explain
 
Typically what you define, is the void that God encapsulates. God could also be the energy driving things. Side note, this is why I dislike atheism, they're boring, unimaginative, and have started paving the road to becoming an organized religion based on non-religion. Haha...
 
agreed on the atheism thing

i don't have a problem with all atheism, but there are atheists out there that try to force their views on others... which IMO is just as bad as the Bible slingers that do the same.
 
shrooms said:
Side note, this is why I dislike atheism, they're boring, unimaginative, and have started paving the road to becoming an organized religion based on non-religion. Haha...
Click to expand...

Do atheists share any sort of unified set of beliefs? Can there be mystical atheisms?

ebola
 
Sort of. I don't think atheism itself is particularly specific about what, exactly, it rejects, and it certainly doesn't stipulate what someone believes instead (ie, their ontology of choice).

ebola
 
to me, that sounds more like nihilism than atheism

if you put any trust in wikipedia, here is the first sentence of their article on atheism: "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities"
 
TNW said:
to me, that sounds more like nihilism than atheism
Click to expand...

I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive (in fact, nihilism probably implies atheism).

if you put any trust in wikipedia, here is the first sentence of their article on atheism: "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities"
Click to expand...

And thus we begin again down the windy road of figuring out what a deity is. Regardless of our answer, though, there are many, MANY ontologies compatible with atheism (likely a wider variety than are compatible with any particular religion).

ebola
 
ebola? said:
I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive (in fact, nihilism probably implies atheism).
Click to expand...

i agree, they are not mutually exclusive. in a strict sense -- all nihilists are atheists, but not all atheists are nihilists. and the words do, of course, have two different meanings.

in reality, though, any individual's set of beliefs is likely not to be that black and white.

we're getting off topic, though.





did i decide to believe in god? or was it predetermined? =p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top