Free Will? NAWW!

[Promethium147]

Let us examine what is meant by Free Will.

This is the concept that I make my own choices, freely, from a selection of choices.

Of course, Limited Choices means limits to Free Will. I further may have potential choices that I am simply unaware of, and this further limits the Freedom of my Will.

Adam and Eve had severely limited choices, they were unaware of their nakedness, for instance; when they became aware, they chose to cover themselves.

They had one major choice - eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (never says "apple") or not. God tried to limit this choice with the threat of death - negative motivation - death the very same day, for partaking of the fruit - and nothing more.

The Serpent came along and told Eve that the fruit was not fatal, but instead, would make them as Gods - and further that's why God lied about it, he feared that Man might become as powerful, or more powerful, than he.

And so, the experiment - note that to motivate it, Adam and Eve had to disbelieve God, and believe the Serpent - how naughty.

And it turns out - God lied, and Adam lived another 937 years. The Serpent proved absolutely reliable. Yet - pinhead Adam keeps beleiving in God's truth, and the Lies of the Serpent. What's going on here?

DISCUSS!

[Tom62]

It is just a stupid myth.

[Asmodean]

Can you call Adam and Eve example for excercise of free will? Is free will not supposed to imply an as much un-influenced and un-biased decision as possible? Sort of like a toss of a coin?

Like if I have total amnesia and stand at a crossroads, not knowing where I'm coming from or where I'm going to, I am as likely to turn right as left.

[Promethium147]

I don't think it a STUPID myth per se. There are many beautiful concepts for the time of writing; the Fruit is generalized, the Tree has a Hierarchical structure, the Serpent is symbolic of Immortality (because it sheds its skin, and appears reborn), The Garden is bliss - the Bliss of Ignorance.

Why didn't God just back up a tiny bit, and discard these two, and start over with the rest of the scheme intact? Hmm... perhaps he was too Weak, just a Poser.

Why was the Tree even there? Is it because it predated God, it made him God, and he couldn't stay God without it? He had the Knowledge, but not the power to hide the Knowledge from others effectively - Knowledge is Bigger than God, apparently.

It is the common interpretation of it I find absurd - designed to support Authority by Force, rather than the obvious interpretation as Value in Rebellion.

--------------------------------------

Can you call Adam and Eve example for exercise of free will?

Yes - very limited free will.

Is free will not supposed to imply an as much un-influenced and un-biased decision as possible?

Yes - it makes less-limited free will.

Sort of like a toss of a coin?

Tossing a coin is not necessarily random - when we CHOOSE to toss a coin, we are saying - I must choose, only one, but I have no basis for rational discrimination between possible choices - can't compute difference in value of choice consequences from here - lack info.

And choosing on the basis of my biases is a choice - that everyone makes. Destroying bias is difficult, and we are lazy. We are free, but consequences of free choice might restrict us OOPS.

They had a freedom in choosing, and chose. God could not stop them, only threaten them with lies - stealing their choice. God could not hide or destroy the Tree - or, he wanted it to himself, I guess. The freedom here is very, very limited, but the choice is there within this freedom, and they CHOSE based upon the information they had - apparently, they preferred risk of death to willful ignorance - Bravo!

The Evil here was God. In the idiotic common interpretation, God is Good, Man and Serpent are the Evil, where they appear perfectly Noble to me. Adam appears fairly knowledgeable -  God merely made threats, but Serpent gave REASONS, and I think THAT the primary basis for the choice - Serpent argues the point, and offers Good for Free, without threats or personal profit (beyond needling God, which is really fun), and thus appears more trustworthy.

Like if I have total amnesia and stand at a crossroads, not knowing where I'm coming from or where I'm going to, I am as likely to turn right as left.

No, not if you're a superstitious Muslim, who should invariably go right - because of a false belief.

[Will]

This is the concept that I make my own choices, freely, from a selection of choices.

I'd more characterize it as the ability to forge one's own path, even destiny, by deciding why to make a decision and the making it. Our free will is limited by two things: mind and reality.

Adam and Eve had severely limited choices, they were unaware of their nakedness, for instance; when they became aware, they chose to cover themselves.

The Adam and Eve of the Torah and Old Test. were tricked by the deceitful god character (also called "I Am"). How can one without the understanding of good and evil be held responsible for doing something wrong?

The Bible teaches us in amazingly clear terms that we are not guided by a benevolent force. There is no celestial father, there to wipe the blood from our wounds and to provide for us that which we cannot provide for ourselves. A god like the one described in the bible teaches in fact that reality is inconsistent and that our best ally is ourselves. It's a shame that none of the authors of the Bible really discussed the deconstruction and rebuilding of self. Once one gains control of one's self, one can then strike out to develop their own destiny and explore what free will really means.

[Voter]

Let us examine what is meant by Free Will.

This is the concept that I make my own choices, freely, from a selection of choices.

OK as far as it goes, but I'll point out that free will can be examined by results, or by process.

Of course, Limited Choices means limits to Free Will. I further may have potential choices that I am simply unaware of, and this further limits the Freedom of my Will.

Adam and Eve had severely limited choices, they were unaware of their nakedness, for instance; when they became aware, they chose to cover themselves.

They had one major choice - eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (never says "apple") or not. God tried to limit this choice with the threat of death - negative motivation - death the very same day, for partaking of the fruit - and nothing more.

The Serpent came along and told Eve that the fruit was not fatal, but instead, would make them as Gods - and further that's why God lied about it, he feared that Man might become as powerful, or more powerful, than he.

And so, the experiment - note that to motivate it, Adam and Eve had to disbelieve God, and believe the Serpent - how naughty.

Actually, Adam was not deceived, but ate anyway.

And it turns out - God lied, and Adam lived another 937 years. The Serpent proved absolutely reliable. Yet - pinhead Adam keeps beleiving in God's truth, and the Lies of the Serpent. What's going on here?

DISCUSS!

The death as separation from God explanation is well-known and sufficient.

[afreethinker30]

The whole thing with Adam and Eve is that they were childlike in the no-knowledge world,they knew nothing of pain or hunger,fear,rage ...You tell any child or most adults not to do something and it eats at them until they eventually do it.Adam and Eve the story is a fable..Eve no mother Adam no father.Free will can be limitless in limited situations.Will I have breakfeast or will I finish the dishes,will I wash the dishes or watch tv.It's there no matter how small,and it may be only in certain situations.We don't have control over everything that's true,but we still have plenty of choices in this world.

[Loffler]

The whole thing with Adam and Eve is that they were childlike in the no-knowledge world,they knew nothing of pain or hunger,fear,rage ...You tell any child or most adults not to do something and it eats at them until they eventually do it.Adam and Eve the story is a fable..Eve no mother Adam no father.Free will can be limitless in limited situations.Will I have breakfeast or will I finish the dishes,will I wash the dishes or watch tv.It's there no matter how small,and it may be only in certain situations.We don't have control over everything that's true,but we still have plenty of choices in this world.

This certainly explains why my spoiled rotten nieces are so disobedient.

[Promethium147]

Me so Happy! Entire Forum Following gets A.

Now for A+!

Something I see throughout these Forums, and everywhere I go - Thesis and Synthesis, without proper Analysis - Building Skyscrapers of Reason from purest Crap, from Parts that do not work.

EWWWW! All Fall Down! Analysis comes first, and when all fails - we must go all the way back. Don't be lazy here - it makes much, much more work, and produces nothing of value!

Free Will has an simple, most basic element, an "atom" - TWO choices, between to acts, and one choice is - Inaction. NEVER forget this choice! It is the greatest freedom of all - indifference! Fundies abuse it - YOU can USE it! Without it, you are easily victimized by the False Dilemma - and may wind up a Republicrat, or worse - for shame.

You don't wanna go there - at least - you don't wanna GET there! And of course, this is the direction most are going.

We already know everything we need to to make the world work; we have lots of things well and properly analysed, and can build literally anything from them. Let's do that!

--------------------------------------------------

I am, of course, familiar with the "spiritual death" of Adam argument. He became Free of God, and they equate it with Death - no, WORSE than mere death, much worse. When I first heard it, I was outraged - blatant cheating in debate, cold as stone, face to face, with a smile - ultimate patronization, which is to call another a fool for cleanly and honestly asking the most sincere question - for which you have no real answer.

So I cooled down, and said - "but if that is the case, and the word "death" at this early point in the book, the first time death is ever mentioned in the book - means "spiritual death", then surely - every incidence of the word "death" in the book that follows means Spiritual Death, and there would, in fact, be no - Physical Death. Otherwise, the words in your book can mean anything at all - INCLUDING nothing!"

- And then he immediately agreed - there was no, is no, Physical Death! EGAD!

In general, this is the process of ad hoc invention of evidence from one source - the Bible - where little resides. ( I call it one source, but - I know of one publishing company alone that produces 53 entirely different Protestant Biblical texts - and you can be assured that they are all quite inerrant, too.)

And why do we argue with such a person? Many make big bucks doing it - and we call them Psychiatrists.

Note that if you listen to a prosthelyte, argue with his points and immediately destroy each such that he can't respond, and even is forced to agree  - he walks off, to repeat all these arguments again.

He is not looking for argument - he is looking for Victims.

[Asmodean]

Tossing a coin is not necessarily random - when we CHOOSE to toss a coin, we are saying - I must choose, only one, but I have no basis for rational discrimination between possible choices - can't compute difference in value of choice consequences from here - lack info.

You misinterpreted me. I said "like toss of a coin", not "like tossing a coin". The difference is in object of this statement. I was talking about the coin, not the one who tosses it.

If you toss a coin and choose a path according to the way it lands, you are basing your decision on that. Thus, in itself, it is not an excercise of (absolute) free will.

[susangail]

Of course, Limited Choices means limits to Free Will. I further may have potential choices that I am simply unaware of, and this further limits the Freedom of my Will.

Limited religion is what I would say. You can think and do all you want.... in their box, which isn't so big.
-God hardened Pharoh's heart (which violates free will) in Exodus when Moses was told (by God) to ask the Pharoh to free his people.
-Judas was destined to betray Jesus. That was set in motion. Apparently he chose to do that (free will) but it was predestined. Someone had to do it (according to God) so God appointed someone (Judas) to do it. Impeachment of free will anyone?

They had one major choice - eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (never says "apple") or not. God tried to limit this choice with the threat of death - negative motivation - death the very same day, for partaking of the fruit - and nothing more.

I've had an entire debate on "the fruit isn't an apple... or is it?" in my Impact group at church. And God said "for you will surely die" but I was always taught that He didn't mean literally die, but die in the sin sense. But it's like when you tell the kid not to touch the hot stove. You know they're going to want to even more just because you said that. But they have to touch it so they can learn from experience to not touch it in the future. Tell a (sinful) human NOT to do something, even with the penalty of "death", and they will want to do it even more. God should know this.

The Serpent came along and told Eve that the fruit was not fatal, but instead, would make them as Gods - and further that's why God lied about it, he feared that Man might become as powerful, or more powerful, than he.

The serpent said they would be like God with knowledge and whatnot. He deceived but he didn't lie. They had no knowledge of the "world" like good and evil because it didn't exist to them (hence ignorance of "naked" and them all of a sudden "shit we're naked!").

And it turns out - God lied, and Adam lived another 937 years. The Serpent proved absolutely reliable. Yet - pinhead Adam keeps beleiving in God's truth, and the Lies of the Serpent. What's going on here?

Again, I was taught that "you will surely die" was not literal death but death in the sense that you will be sinful. Bleh.

* * *

Free will is a joke in the Bible. It's supposed to prove God's love. He could easily make us all robots to worship Him perfectly, but that wouldn't be loving (and He wouldn't get His glory), so He wants us to choose Him. That way, we truly love Him, He didn't force us into anything, and He gets His glory. But of course, if you don't choose God, then you burn in hell. What a choice. I wonder... what about those kids raised in Christianity (like me)? We didn't choose it, as much as the church likes to say. Hmm....

[Promethium147]

You misinterpreted me. I said "like toss of a coin", not "like tossing a coin". The difference is in object of this statement. I was talking about the coin, not the one who tosses it.

I do sometimes have difficulty with all the possible meaning(s) of incomplete sentences - but not here.

I fully realize that Coin Toss is a general analogy for Random. But to do it, and base our action on it, is a Choice. We might say the Coin (or any other randomization engine, I own some very sophisticated ones) makes the choice; but no, we CHOOSE to follow the random result before we begin, and use the little engine. After obtaining the Choice from the engine, we have not yet acted - and may CHOOSE to discard the result.

Commonly, we would resort to bias immediately - and as an accomplished military and private sector cryptologist (Mil/Ind Complex, really) I would assert there is no Random - anywhere, ever. Our Universe cannot support it. Our last Great Randomness was Cosmic background Radiation - but map it, and the pattern is quite intuitively clear.

"Random" merely means I cannot see the pattern -YET.

Bias is much better than Random, for it is based in something - no matter how bad.

If you toss a coin and choose a path according to the way it lands, you are basing your decision on that. Thus, in itself, it is not an exercise of (absolute) free will.

Yep. You have Chosen to base your decision on that - you are letting It be the Decider. This is why we call GW The Decider, sarcasitcally - his decision process appears random - to most; others see pattern - and become greatly alarmed.

There IS no "absolute" free will, that is my point - there are only degrees of free will, but there are "atoms" with subparticles of Free Will. There is minimum size - and maximum size to it. Finite - and bounded on both ends. The subparticles are many, but Inaction is the major one.

"Absolute" Free Will would not imply, but would require, (Infinity of possible actions - any initial cost of acting + no possible consequences whatsoever.) Thus, Absolute Free Will - to accomplish absolutely nothing. I would have to CHOOSE a Motivation, tho - and that appears Random, or at best - biased.

The Universe is quite finite, bounded in both directions. Can't work.

[Voter]

I am, of course, familiar with the "spiritual death" of Adam argument. He became Free of God, and they equate it with Death - no, WORSE than mere death, much worse. When I first heard it, I was outraged - blatant cheating in debate, cold as stone, face to face, with a smile - ultimate patronization, which is to call another a fool for cleanly and honestly asking the most sincere question - for which you have no real answer.

So I cooled down, and said - "but if that is the case, and the word "death" at this early point in the book, the first time death is ever mentioned in the book - means "spiritual death", then surely - every incidence of the word "death" in the book that follows means Spiritual Death, and there would, in fact, be no - Physical Death. Otherwise, the words in your book can mean anything at all - INCLUDING nothing!"

Incorrect. A single word can have different meanings in the same book. Happens all the time. We determine the correct meaning through context.