Does free will exist?

I suppose what drives one's nature is that endlessly-argued-over balance between nature and nurture; or, to relate it to this thread, the balance between what is in one's genetic makeup and what experiences have driven one's brain to be connected up in the way it is. (And those connections are driven by experience whether they are considered to be supporting one's conscious thought processes, one's unconscious thought processes and - if that's how the brain works - both.)

Yes, we do delude ourselves if we believe that only conscious thought processes can deliver decisions. But once we accept that isn't true, what next?
 
I'm not sure it matters either, mosaix, except in the sense that it may undermine some people's self-image as rational beings. (Not that there's ever been much evidence for that ludicrous proposition. ;):))
 
Yes, we do delude ourselves if we believe that only conscious thought processes can deliver decisions. But once we accept that isn't true, what next?

Once you start to question, and where possible examine, what drives your wants, decisions and beliefs (rather than believing that because they were conscious, they must have been rational) you can hopefully avoid some of the worst ones.

Culture and parental influence has a very powerful grip on people's beliefs, which (I think) they often try to rationally justify, because that's easier than the difficult process of examination. You can probably never be free of the influence of such values, but it might help, where they clash with others, to realise where they come from and why we subscribe to them.
 
Once you start to question, and where possible examine, what drives your wants, decisions and beliefs (rather than believing that because they were conscious, they must have been rational) you can hopefully avoid some of the worst ones.

Culture and parental influence has a very powerful grip on people's beliefs, which (I think) they often try to rationally justify, because that's easier than the difficult process of examination. You can probably never be free of the influence of such values, but it might help, where they clash with others, to realise where they come from and why we subscribe to them.

Very true HB. For the past couple of years I've tried to examine my 'belief systems' in some detail. Some quite minor things - why do I read this newspaper? Why do I listen to that radio program? I've gone as far as changing my behaviour in an attempt to understand things better.

The result? - I've found out that there's some absolute cr*p on the radio if you look for it. :mad:

Still, I think the exercise is, fundamentally, a healthy one.
 
This is a big one. I haven't read the thread, just the title.

There is free will.

There is the law.

But I think any system of co-existence between superior and inferior civilizations must enshrine the Law of Free Will, as it is enshrined in cosmic law.

A 'superior' civilization may advise and warn an inferior one, but may under no circumstances interfere UNLESS INVITED.

This is also the issue of prayer: that even God is constrained by the Law of Free Will from interference in the affairs of man, unless invited to do so?
 
Last edited:
This is also the issue of prayer: that even God is constrained by the Law of Free Will from interference in the affairs of man, unless invited to do so?

Since you asked.....I have made comments before and mixed the subject of free will with a creator/deity, but I will stick more to the question at hand.
It is from my understanding that you are correct with the notion as you already know of mankind's fall, it is up to the individual to earnestly seek God out. Humanity thought they could govern themselves as well as God so they separated themselves from Him. There are scriptures that say his symbolic eyes are roving about the earth searching the hearts of mankind, it says also he wants nobody to be destroyed, not even evil doers, but some will give him no choice. God follows a set of principles for himself, and I thought that was very interesting as it made Him more real to me, and He must do so perfectly because everything made it to this point. If God followed man's principles the universe would be stuck on the side of the road or need much maintenance after the warranty ran out.:D
So more to the prayer thing, nothing escapes His notice, not even prayers, but they are not all heard. Since he really already knows what any individual needs before they ask it, he is looking for humility in the heart to inspire. God is not a football fan. Sorry, but it's true.
 
So more to the prayer thing, nothing escapes His notice, not even prayers, but they are not all heard. Since he really already knows what any individual needs before they ask it, he is looking for humility in the heart to inspire. God is not a football fan. Sorry, but it's true.

I've always been told that they are all heard, but you don't always get the answer you want. Like, sometimes the answer is, "No." Not saying this is or isn't what I believe, just that this is what I've been taught.
 
Yeah, I've heard that too, I like it. It sounds...optimistic. Something I was told as a child and the principle is sound. I think what I wrote really was in line with that. By heard, I meant answered in the way they thought. I guess that could be a definitive no, or maybe not just yet....
 
All of which leads to the big question: why is there no customer complaints number or URL?
 
... So more to the prayer thing, nothing escapes His notice, not even prayers, but they are not all heard. Since he really already knows what any individual needs before they ask it, he is looking for humility in the heart to inspire. God is not a football fan. Sorry, but it's true.

Yes, but the point is that because a person has free will, and because even God is not allowed to overstep that line, God can't help someone unless they ask for help ...
 
Generally speaking, it seems as if humans always (perhaps by fear) put limitations, borders, parameters, fences around everything. Maybe even in my attempting to explain what is in my head, it has come out as seemingly limitations on God's part. That is not my intent. So I thought about it and came to the conclusion the only thing God cannot do is force us to do anything such as believe in him. Not because he does not have the ability to, but because it would take away our freedom of choice. Some would call that free will.

Oh, Ursa, there is a customer complaints department, it's called prayer. It just does not have to be so formal as the world would have you believe. But you already knew that, huh? ;)
 
So I thought about it and came to the conclusion the only thing God cannot do is force us to do anything such as believe in him. Not because he does not have the ability to, but because it would take away our freedom of choice. Some would call that free will.

Now I've also been told that God "cannot lie." Not to mention that Paul said, "God is love." If God is love, he is incapable of hate, too. In my mind, these things mean that he does have limitations of some kind.
 
God isn't actually a person, you know. People have limitations, as do animals, tooth-brushes, apple trees and planets. God, if I understand the various writings I've skim-read properly, is, conceptually, an all-embracing, Universal consciousness, unhindered by divisions of nature or dimensions. Having consciousness ourselves allows us to become connected with God, though God is always connected with us. It is we who are limited or who limit ourselves.

Some philosophies, which I like, see Love as balance and Hate as imbalance. The more we balance our natures, the closer we come to understanding Love as a concept whose opposite is not Hate, but Fear. It's not unlike what Hippies have been telling us for years, but they were usually too distracted by hedonistic ego-pleasures to follow it to its ultimate extent. And who can blame them.

When Bible scholars talk of God being Love, some of them realise that they are really asking us to discard everything that creates imbalance and conflict and embrace only those things which bring balance and harmony to ourselves and others.

We are free to choose to do this. However, the influences and disturbances of the World we inhabit make it difficult and the vast majority eventually fail. For this reason, retreats and monasteries and isolated Tibetan temples sprang up to enable people to pursue their spiritual purposes without distraction.

How easy would it be to choose this simplicity of life and gain our souls? Except, of course, that by now most of us are really, really fond of our material distractions and think that the whole Spiritual Enlightenment thing is fine in theory, but....
 
Now I've also been told that God "cannot lie." Not to mention that Paul said, "God is love." If God is love, he is incapable of hate, too. In my mind, these things mean that he does have limitations of some kind.

Lofty eyes, a false tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart devising hurtful schemes, feet that are running to badness, a false witness that says lies, and anyone sending forth contention with others. These are all things that are said God hates. Does he hate feet that he created? No. All the above things come from a bad heart. Of all of those things listed, no one would like it if they were hurt in some way as a result of those things. Those things do not make life better. If you hate what is bad, then God hates what is bad. There is a proper way to do or view everything.
 
Did God tell you this or did you come up with this one on your own? I mean no sarcasm here, but unless you are sure, maybe you should feel a little silly sometime and ask him.

I'm sure. If God were a person, we'd call Him Jess and use a small H on 'him'.
 
The Parson bites his tongue and doesn't comment on the ideas about God, but will say that when he writes about God in the pronoun sense he doesn't use a capital letter on the pronoun. It is an out of date writing convention, even in theological circles.
 
It is an out of date writing convention, even in theological circles.
Flying off at a tangent - yes, I know; I don't usually do this :rolleyes: - and recalling that this site is mostly involved with fiction....

It may be true that at the current time, in the places you or I inhabit, you are right. But in describing other societies, they may still have (or have returned to having or have only recently developed) this convention, in which case the writer would be remiss in not using it. And where multiple PoVs are in play, some may follow the convention and others not, helping to remind the reader where each of the "narrating" characters are coming from, at least on this issue.

(Oh, and it also might help writers to avoid confusion where He and he - and/or She and she - identify different characters/entities.)
 
Ursa, I think I understood what you were saying there. So, Okay, in the society that I normally inhabit the use of a capital to reference the deity in pronoun is considered out of date, but this may not be so in every society, and it will sometimes help in writing fiction.

Does this discussion prove the existence of free will?
 

Back
Top