Loooking for philosophers

[W. M.]

As someone who does considerable reading and thinking, I have come to the conclusion that free will and predeterminism are not necessarily incompatable, but rather co-exist within our multiverse. There are several levels that this concept could be explored on, so I'll just choose a couple.

One day I was walking along the bridge over a near-by lake and noticed some interesting wave patterns. Over the horizon, there was a large system of waves, which was controlling (for lack of a better term) another system of mid-sized waves, which controlled a set of tiny wavelets. I was noticing how those tiny wavelets were flowing, and thought: If those wavelets were sentient beings, they would be unaware that they were being controlled by the larger two wave systems described previously. Instead, they may think they have free will and that they're controlling themselves. This is what we will call perceptive free will.

We may be living under perceptive free will because while we think we're controlling our own destinies, there are in fact larger systems that control us. This is akin to the 'box on the coffee table scenario', whereas there are people (perhaps us) living in that box, going about our daily lives without even knowing that we are trapped forever in that bax, which may sit on the coffee table of a much higher intelligence than us. From our perspective the inside of that box is the entirety of existance.

On the other hand, Free will, at least in limited form, is equally plausable. If you believe in God, you may also believe that, although he may pre-destine us to get to a certain point in our lives, he gives us some leeway as to the exact direction we will take. For instance, let's use a very simple example: God wants you to get up out of bed, get dressed, and go eat breakfast (no one is allowed at the table in a state of un-dress!). Now, God may not care what clothes you choose to wear as he would leave that up to you, just so you wear something. Of course, no matter what you choose to wear, you would still get to the point where God wants you to be: dressed and at the table.

Another thing to consider is the typical causality diagram. At the top, there is a starting point, with branches leading to other points in the diagram. If it pre-determined that you will get to the final point at the bottom, then you may have a certain amount of free will as to which other points that you will stop at before reaching the ending point at the diagram's bottom. Of course, God may grant free will to individuals based on their past obediance to him, or maybe their specific abilities, or perhaps some other criteria unknown to us.

Another aspect is the Otherworlds theory, which states that when we take an action in our universe, we have a counterpart in another universe that took the opposite action. If this is the case, we have three possibilities: 1) We make the initial decision, and therefore our parallel universe counterpart gets stuck with the decision we did not make, 2) the reverse happens, in that we in this universe are controlled by a counterpart who, for some reason, gets to control us by being the one to make a good decisons for him/herself, and sticking us with the bad alternatives, or 3) Each person, in their own universe has been pre-destined to behave the way they do, and all the decisions are made between the different universes simultaneously.

BTW, the current edition of Philosophy Magazine has a good article about Kant Vs. Hume and how Kant also thought that pre-determinism and free will could coincide with eath other.

Anybody here up for a game of "What is my doppleganger doing right now"?

[Pandora]

Aside from quantum effects, which have no significance in the space time universe, all events are causally determined. This has been a solid theory since Newton. If you have evidence of free will (an event that has no cause whatsoever) then whoever presents evidence of it will surely become famous.

[michaelrevans@mac.com]

MANOLO’S LULLABY

In the company of the great spirit
the Maria wind spoke to the grandfathers
about the ballet of birth
through endless space. A continuous ray of light
that brought forth a mighty sound
and the wind was first born and came to life.

From obscure origins came the recipe of life,
for all living things commune with the spirit
world. Beyond the the cave walls,the sound
of earths gravity flowed down toward the grandfathers
while the gravity of living light
was being drawn back to the source of it’s birth.

At the moment of birth
you may find a master to devote your life.
God resides in the seeds of light,
the essence of his spirit
speaks to the grandfathers
through the little ones sound.

In the language of dreams comes the the sound
of many lives and the moments of their birth
in a constant chord with all the grandfathers .
All time is one with this life,
a seamless thread weaving the spirit
into a an endless fabric of holy light.

In the darkness, it is the light
that leads our way. It is the sound
of tears and children's play that wakens the spirit
within us and gives birth
to our humanity. Light sound and life
are eternal, so say the grandfathers.

The great spirit has told the grandfathers
that the holy stream of light
and the holy stream of life
and the holy stream of sound
can never die for their birth
has never been. Eternal is the spirit.

The grandfathers listen for the sound
of light in every birth.

1999

[yogi]

Aside from quantum effects, which have no significance in the space time universe, all events are causally determined. This has been a solid theory since Newton. If you have evidence of free will (an event that has no cause whatsoever) then whoever presents evidence of it will surely become famous.

A good discussion about what is free will and God -pages 14 onwards from the book- The power of intension, by Dr wayne Dyer. "Free Will" - is misnomer and an illusion. We believe that we have a free will- choosing one or the other but if looked from the point of cosmic scale ( Universal consciousness-you see, we canot go forward an inch without involving consciousness) it may have been predetermined. our ego makes us believe that to be an act of free will

sincerely,
yogi

[W. M.]

our ego makes us believe that to be an act of free will

Then I must be egotistical !

Seriously, if there's no such thing as free will altogether, why do we hold individuals responsible for their actions (i.e. have a justice system)?

As I've said before, I believe free will is possible on a limited basis. For instance, we were designed to get hungry so we would need to eat food, so we eat in general because we get hungry by design, which is not free will. But let's say, for example, you go to the fridge to get something to eat, and you find only two items in there, which you like equally: a chicken drumstick and a hamburger. You decide to eat the chicken. Since you liked the hamburger as well as the chicken, when asked why you ate the chicken your response would probably be "because I wanted to." That sounds like a certain amount of free will to me.

But back to my first example here: We live in a society in which we 'proove' for lack of a better term (although unscientifically) our belief in free will through our justice system. We hold trials and send criminals to jail through the justice system because they chose to break the law, and we believe that they could have not committed the crime they are convicted for. Again, free will. Therefore, we are holding them personally accountable for their actions, which we could not in good conscience do if they couldn't help but do what they did. In that case we would have an injustice system.

Again, maybe the evidence of a limited amount of free will makes itself known in small ways via contemporary things in our everyday lives.

[yogi]

Then I must be egotistical !

Since you liked the hamburger as well as the chicken, when asked why you ate the chicken your response would probably be "because I wanted to." That sounds like a certain amount of free will to me.

please do not take comments as to be personal.
well your exact word "certain amount of free will" is indicative of subjective term. i.e. concept of free will is individualistic.
Finally let me make some comment about your example of a justice system -
IF a person kill somebody. we adjudicate and serve justice by punishing the murderer with death sentence. we say this will deter others in community from doing similar crimes. proponents also say that punishment is necessary to teach a lesson. Criminal in previous example is dead, how can he/she learn lesson from the punishment? this is possible only if life after death continues ( concept of reincarnation). i am not against justice system.

sincerely
yogi

[W. M.]

please do not take comments as to be personal.

I didn't take your comments personally, as that part of my reply was meant in good humor/tounge-in-cheek.

well your exact word "certain amount of free will" is indicative of subjective term. i.e. concept of free will is individualistic.

Many concepts are individualistic IMHO, which is why it's difficult for us to come up with a commonly-agreed upon TOE. For example, take time: Some researchers and philosophers think time is an illusion, while others believe it is very real. Another is religion, where some worship one god while others worship another, and still some worship none. Even in cosmology scientists can't agree on whether the universe will continually expand or end in a "big crunch". Subjectivity is one of the largest challanges to developing a common TOE, but also makes it interesting .

As for the predeterminism/free will debate goes, I feel as though I must walk a fine line between the two of them, as I've stated previously.

[zeroca]

The nonexistence is the main distinguishing parameter of the god: as it doesn’t exist so it does never arise or fade away, i.e. it’s absolute, eternal, permanent. . .

[jeffprice]

Hi everyboby;

IMHO, We are a product of our envirorment. My research over the last 40+ years has led me to believe that everything is predestine and we have everything dictated to us based on our genetics, enviroment and experiences. As far as purpose, that is also dictated to us based on the previously mentioned items.

I do not like some of my findings, but destiny has taken me to this point. I refuse to give in to ignorance and greed.

Be carefull what you look for. You might find it.

Best regards, John A.

John,

I believe you would be correct to say that our environment plays a large part in determining what choices we make in life, but to say that environment predetermines our future ignores our freedom to choose our actions in response to our environment. Admittedly, our environment does give us the knowledge and experience that we draw from when making our choices. However, we still have a choice to make. In fact we can choose to change our environment and in so doing change our destiny.

To prove my point (that we have the ability to make undetermined choices) let me propose a simple experiment. Choose a number between one and ten. Now, choose again.

It would be rather silly to say that your first choice was in any way affected by your environment. Your DNA is not hardwired to choose a specific number, your parents didn't likely reward you with treats to get you to always choose a specific number, your experience hasn't likely taught you that choosing one specific number is better than another, and no one forced you to pick that number. It was simply a number chosen at random, not one that was predetermined.

Now, your second choice is somewhat affected by your experience. Most likely, you chose a different number the second time because you probably think that is what is expected and you already chose the other number once. But since there was nothing to stop you from choosing the same number, (I said choose again. Not choose a different number.) your environment may have affected your choice.

I hope I haven’t over-simplified the issue, but I think this will explain my thinking.

Jeff

[zeroca]

free will and predeterminism are not necessarily incompatable, but rather co-exist within our multiverse

Hi W. M.!
Generally agree with you.
Here's a little eastern story:
Once, a rider came to a spring, which was built in a deserted place on a crossroad among several villages. Without dismounting, he drank the water and continued riding. But he didn’t notice that his purse, heavy with gold coins dropped to the ground.
In a little while another man, pedestrian came to this place, drank the water, saw the purse, took it, shoved into his pocket and left, choosing different from rider direction to another village.
The rider at last noticed his lost, rode back and just found there the third person who was drinking the water (so he missed the second one). As soon as the rider approached him, he commanded to return his purse, but the man standing there couldn’t understand what the rider was talking about and expressed his wonder. The rider became furious, took his sword and cut off his head.
The moral could be: think, before you act, because you can harm innocent person.
But all was different:
Before, long ago, ancestors of all three persons knew each other and ancestor of rider was killed by the ancestor of the third pedestrian without a motive and without listening his justificatory explanations, but the ancestor of the second pedestrian (which found the purse) tried to reconcile them and even didn’t spare his own money for it, but without success, so we can say that history repeated itself with high precise. If we add to this story unproved theory of reincarnation, and show that all three descendents were the same persons as ancestors, the moral will turn into the following metaphorical conclusion:
At the level of fate we choose today, act tomorrow, and receive the result the day after tomorrow but result is precise answer to our actions, so today, in the moment of choice we live with the results of our yesterdays’ action, which itself is result of our intentions from the day before yesterday.
But anyway I’m not quite sure of it!