A very philosophical thread

Yes... and this is a direct result of man's evolutional thought - new and accrued, mental, interpretations of the DVD.

 

I think it comes from you and your understanding and perspective of the circumstance.

To convince people to be kind... I wonder if its possible.

 

Hey man, depending on what the choice was about, you have to remember how important these events actually are.

I sometimes find myself torn between two choices and find myself feeling an impending doom if i make the "wrong" choice, even if it isn't apparent what choice that is. I get a type of worry, sometimes to the point of anxiety, over this issue, and it takes me a while to figure out that my choices..

don't mean the end of the world...

In a grand view of things, they are nearly inconsequential. But even on a person to person scale, my choices can still likely be changed. And even if they can't, relaxation can help me realize what choice I truly want, despite social pressures or otherwise. Then I weigh the pros and cons of each situation, and it helps me decide what to do.

I don't do this a lot but when there is something meaningful on the mind, it helps a lot

 

[quote name='"GGrass"']To smoke, or not to smoke.

That is the question.

--

When you choose between two things, where does that choice come from?

Does it come from you, or does it come from the circumstances?[/quote]

I have been going over free will in my philosophy class, and to me, compatiblism makes the most sense. It comes down to the definition of free will. Compatibilism defines free will as the ability to choose free of constraint. (hypnosis, physical force, coercion, or compulsion) So as long as you can choose your actions freely you are exercising free will, however Compatibilists still believe that past actions or behavior have a part in setting up the situation of a choice, but you are ultimately responsible for your decisions, so long as there is no constraint. In contrast Determinism states that actions are causally (not casually) determined, or that everything is in a cause and effect relationship. Therefore if an action is determined by causality, then man is not exercising free will.

If that didnt make sense I'm sorry I just blazed up, and its a little hard to think.

 

Heh. I view free will as a free conscious choice independent of previous cause and condition. My existence is one big chain of cause-effect events therefore there's no free will.

 

[quote name='"Ryan1411"']Heh. I view free will as a free conscious choice independent of previous cause and condition. My existence is one big chain of cause-effect events therefore there's no free will.[/quote]

What if I were sitting on a couch and decided to go to the fridge for a brew? If someone were to point a pistol at my head and tell me to go get a beer it can be said that I am nit acting freely. But if I were to get up on my own and get a beer, free of the above conditions; and even though this action may have a cause i.e. thirst, it is from my point of view irrelevant. It's is not when my action has any cause, but only a certain kind of cause, should it be viewed as not being free i.e. constraint.

 

Every event leading up to your thirst was the result of a previous event though. There is no "you" that can transcend this chain of events to make a free conscious choice. No free-will.

 

doesn't everything we experience (consciously or unconsciously) through our senses release some sort of chemical reaction in the brain?

 

[quote name='"Ryan1411"']

Every event leading up to your thirst was the result of a previous event though. There is no "you" that can transcend this chain of events to make a free conscious choice. No free-will.[/quote]

Since you seem to identify with determinism, do you mind if I ask if you believe in predestination, or follow a denomination of Christianity closely? I am guessing so... But anyway, I don't define free will as free from any causes. I do not deny that past actions/events effect the present and future. Free will is from constraints such as physical force, hypnosis, coercion, or compulsion. An agent may be free to act according to a motive, but that the nature of that motive is determined. I think if some one is compelled to do something under someone else's will then they are not morally responsible. On the other hand if one's actions are not determined by your beliefs, desires, and character then how could one be held responsible for their actions?

 

I'm an atheist...
I don't know the technicalities of philisophical positions. But I'll say that it seems as though everything was determined from the beginning of time. [Not literally determined, as if life were a movie, but determined, as in you can not stray from the cause-effect chain of events,]

Well...like you said. It comes down to how you define free will I guess. I view it as the ability to make a free conscious choice independent of previous condition and cause.

Doesn't matter if we don't have a free conscious choice. The body which is carrying out the detrimental actions is not welcome in a society with a goal of prosperity and productivity. Therefore we banish the people and behaviors that are a detrimental. [Well techically...we do whatever is determined to happen. So anything I talk about is actually just descriptive of the nature of what is occurring deterministically.]

 

Listen to this song and ponder life and love

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV5U8kVYS88&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Chopin Nocturne E Flat Major Op.9 No.2 - YouTube[/ame]

Gotta show people, dunno why

 

I guess we can both agree that actions and behaviors are determined by previous cause and are the effects thereof.

Although we seem to hold different views on free will.

 

[quote name='"GGrass"']

No man. That made a lot of sense.

Compatibilism and Determinism.

Got it.



Just the fact that the idea of compatibilism exists, suggests that there is in fact such thing as 'free will'. Then the idea of compatibilism goes on to explain what this 'free will' really is.

But is it even possible to have free will in the first place?

Can we ever be free of constraint?[/quote]

That's why I like Compatibilism, it gives a good definition (IMO) of free will, without out denying the fact that past actions/behaviors have a part in setting up present and future situations.

I don't think we are ever free from constraint, but it is only under a certain kind of restraint i.e. hypnosis, physical force, compulsion, or coercion that one cannot be demonstrating "free will." The fact that past actions/behaviors may dictate the nature of your decisions is irrelevant to the compatiblist view. The ability to choose free from physical force, hypnosis, compulsion, or coercion is exercising "free will."

I really like philosophy, I'll go high to class and all we do is talk about morality, free will, and the realness of the outside physical world (a matrix type scenario) so far. I would highly recommend taking a philosophy class in college as a multicultural or humanities credit.