-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
And, adding to T_Laurich's point about solipsism, I want to talk about this scientifically... Science isn't designed to deal with the solipsistic question. It's designed to deal with the physical world. Free will, if does exist, would reasonably be found in the brain. The brain is part of the physical world. So, let's use the scientific method to explore this.
I'm not sure what you mean by "something different than how things work in the universe." If you mean atoms and elements and molecules, no, these things make up everything, icluding the brain and what makes the brain function. Just adding a lightswitch doesn't change much. Ot still performs the same function, just at a predetermined time or setting. It would be more analogous to compare it to a video game, where a character has many programmed responses to stimuli, and the repsonses will be different depending on which stimulus is presented. It would be even more analougous to compare it to artificial intelligence, where it starts out with only programmed responses, but then learns based on its environment and the responses are no longer in the control of the programmer.
The processes aren't the same, but the molecules, atoms, etc. are.
No, I certainly don't believe there is any magic involved. Again, I don't know if the processes are the same, but verything is made up of the same elements as far as we know. This doesn't really have any bearing, though, on whether you can make decisions. If these processes in you brain lead you to be able to decide between two or more options based on how you feel about certain factors, then I would say that is "free will".
I suppose it can, but a brain is not limited to a set of instructions written by a programmer. It learns and changes over time based on its environment. The light, unless someone comes in and changes the setting, will just keep flipping on and off.
To be honest, like I said, on apragmatic level, it seems to me that we obviously make decisions. When you start looking at it on this very detailed, scientific level, I do not know if it would be correct to say that we have free will based on your definition. I think this is the case no matter which worldview you subscribe to, becasue with or without a God, our brains still work the way they do. All we can do is examine it and see if it fits into the definitions we ascribe to things like free will.
Interestingly though, I wonder if you believe that you can have free will if you believe in an all-knowing God. If a god knows everything that ever has and will happened, then essentially, it is set in stone. There is no way it can happen any differently if the outcome is already known. How can you actually have free will if the outcome is definite. It doesn't have to be determined for you, but just like in a scenariio not involving a god, if every factor in the universe up until that point leads you to make that specific decision, is there actually any possibility that you would choose any other way? This just becomes less possible if some being already knows the choice. So, yes on a pragmatic level, I make choices, and have already made several this morning. Once you look into it, maybe there was no possiblity that I would ever choose anything else. I simply don't think I know the answer.
The processes aren't the same, but the molecules, atoms, etc. are.
No, I certainly don't believe there is any magic involved. Again, I don't know if the processes are the same, but verything is made up of the same elements as far as we know. This doesn't really have any bearing, though, on whether you can make decisions. If these processes in you brain lead you to be able to decide between two or more options based on how you feel about certain factors, then I would say that is "free will".
I suppose it can, but a brain is not limited to a set of instructions written by a programmer. It learns and changes over time based on its environment. The light, unless someone comes in and changes the setting, will just keep flipping on and off.
To be honest, like I said, on apragmatic level, it seems to me that we obviously make decisions. When you start looking at it on this very detailed, scientific level, I do not know if it would be correct to say that we have free will based on your definition. I think this is the case no matter which worldview you subscribe to, becasue with or without a God, our brains still work the way they do. All we can do is examine it and see if it fits into the definitions we ascribe to things like free will.
Interestingly though, I wonder if you believe that you can have free will if you believe in an all-knowing God. If a god knows everything that ever has and will happened, then essentially, it is set in stone. There is no way it can happen any differently if the outcome is already known. How can you actually have free will if the outcome is definite. It doesn't have to be determined for you, but just like in a scenariio not involving a god, if every factor in the universe up until that point leads you to make that specific decision, is there actually any possibility that you would choose any other way? This just becomes less possible if some being already knows the choice. So, yes on a pragmatic level, I make choices, and have already made several this morning. Once you look into it, maybe there was no possiblity that I would ever choose anything else. I simply don't think I know the answer.
K
No I dont believe Jesus was born on the 25th either.Most likely in the fall I think they guesstimate. I know the sign is not stopping Christmas and it really has no bearing on me or what I believe.But when some atheists try to stop the saying of Merry Christmas,or it has to be called a holiday tree etc.I just dont see the reasoning.You said you celebrate Christmas your own way,great,I wouldnt stop you from doing it.So why do some atheists antagonize Christians celebrating Christmas? Just everyone celebrate their own way and enjoy the holiday.
Just to ward off confusion let me say I was only responding to Laurich's proposition that my sense of free will was an illusion. What better illusion was there than the Matrix? 
My request that Laurich prove he had freewill was really only a counterpoint to his request to prove that I don't have it. I am really not much interested in the debate. I will have to go out and refill the gas tank in my car sometime this weekend. It is of no real importance when I do it, only that I do. I have no reason to think that the timing of this event is anyway determined by events within my brain that are beyond my control. I will do it when I choose. If you have no way of arguing that the timing is in someway beyond my control then why argue it at all?
People often don't like the idea that we are hardwired with instincts by evolution in ways similar to other animals, and I suppose this is largely because they (Christians especially) don't like the idea that we are animals. I think we are (no, I know we are) animals, and I think some of our actions are likely determined to some extent by that wiring. Animals that have more developed brains are less dependent on that wiring for their survival than are lesser brained critters, but it is there nonetheless. If I see you yawn, I yawn. In fact if I see a chimp yawn I will yawn. It is hardwired – why is debatable. The drive to mate is also hardwired by evolution, but in us, and perhaps in apes as well, the way we choose to release those urges is governed largely by free will. If you are a cricket you likely don't have much choice – you Just Do It, as the Niki slogan says.
My request that Laurich prove he had freewill was really only a counterpoint to his request to prove that I don't have it. I am really not much interested in the debate. I will have to go out and refill the gas tank in my car sometime this weekend. It is of no real importance when I do it, only that I do. I have no reason to think that the timing of this event is anyway determined by events within my brain that are beyond my control. I will do it when I choose. If you have no way of arguing that the timing is in someway beyond my control then why argue it at all?
People often don't like the idea that we are hardwired with instincts by evolution in ways similar to other animals, and I suppose this is largely because they (Christians especially) don't like the idea that we are animals. I think we are (no, I know we are) animals, and I think some of our actions are likely determined to some extent by that wiring. Animals that have more developed brains are less dependent on that wiring for their survival than are lesser brained critters, but it is there nonetheless. If I see you yawn, I yawn. In fact if I see a chimp yawn I will yawn. It is hardwired – why is debatable. The drive to mate is also hardwired by evolution, but in us, and perhaps in apes as well, the way we choose to release those urges is governed largely by free will. If you are a cricket you likely don't have much choice – you Just Do It, as the Niki slogan says.
I'm talking about science and free will. One good definition of free will uses the phrase "without the constraint of necessity or fate". I think 'fate' is probably there for theological situations... So, can you act "without the constraint of necessity"? To put it another way, when your brain makes 'decisions', is it operating without the constraints that govern the rest of the universe?
"As it is, we seem to make our own choices and have the ability to actually choose either way."
Is there an experiment we can do to demonstrate this?
"If it is some illusion, there is absolutely no reason to suspect it."
I disagree with that part. The reason to suspect that it's an illusion is that the rest of the universe operates in an orderly fashion, according to rules that science can discover. Perhaps you've heard of a 'clockwork' universe? A universe that operates precisely, from one state to the next?
Is there an experiment we can do to demonstrate this?
"If it is some illusion, there is absolutely no reason to suspect it."
I disagree with that part. The reason to suspect that it's an illusion is that the rest of the universe operates in an orderly fashion, according to rules that science can discover. Perhaps you've heard of a 'clockwork' universe? A universe that operates precisely, from one state to the next?
Well, you do agree that the same rules that operate in the rest of the universe also apply to your brain, don't you? The part about Ohm's Law... electricity flows through your brain governed by the same rules that govern it when it flows through the lightbulb, doesn't it?
Yes, I agree that the brain is more complex in its functions. Do the same rules apply?
Yes, I agree that the brain is more complex in its functions. Do the same rules apply?
A
Somewhere in all these posts, there is a question like, 'Why do Christians bother talking with atheists?" Without getting all technical... or argumentative... the answer I would like to suggest is this, "because we told to... we're compelled to...as directed...no... commanded by Jesus in Matthew 28: 19-20. He said to tell the whole world...make disciples (not believers) only the Spirit can do that. We're not required to debate, simply give the good news. And judging by some of the rude comments given in these forums, they will be turned off more than anything else. If something constructive can't be said, it's better not to say anything. And I have been just as guilty of this. To which, I apologize.
And to those who identify as atheists... consider what you hear. I doubt, but, hope that there are some on here who really do love Jesus enough to YOUR best interests at heart... and not simply trying to win a debate.
And to those who identify as atheists... consider what you hear. I doubt, but, hope that there are some on here who really do love Jesus enough to YOUR best interests at heart... and not simply trying to win a debate.
Oh it doesn't scare me, it can't... Solipsism is impossible, unless you don't believe in God then everything is possible and impossible at the same time (It's a huge mess)
See here is the thing, you have no clue that you are actually living, you have no reason to say there is right or wrong... Lets play this out logically...
Let's say I am born with a different chemical balance in my brain and I like to hurt people, and any time I hurt someone it makes me happy. Is it right or wrong that I do this?
Your only answer can be, it's wrong because I don't think you should hurt people, and the question is, how do we know evolution gave you the correct brain?
Or you answer, it's wrong because majority of people don't like to hurt people, and then the question is, how do you know I am not more evolved then everyone else?
You see if I only act the way I do because of the chemicals put into my brain by chance through natural selection, anything I do is not my fault, its evolution's fault for creating me this way and I have no control over what my brain does, only the illusion of free will.
With your pragmatic mind you have to understand that in your philosophy if I was to rape a 2 year old child, it is only because of the chemical reactions in my brain, nothing more, nothing less... You can try to attribute morality to the situation, however, when doing so you are only dancing to the chemicals in your brain. In your philosophy there is no morality, only appeal to majority, or appeal to self. In both cases you get logical fallacy's.
I digress but if you follow the argument further, the theory of no free will is a logical fallacy.
See here is the thing, you have no clue that you are actually living, you have no reason to say there is right or wrong... Lets play this out logically...
Let's say I am born with a different chemical balance in my brain and I like to hurt people, and any time I hurt someone it makes me happy. Is it right or wrong that I do this?
Your only answer can be, it's wrong because I don't think you should hurt people, and the question is, how do we know evolution gave you the correct brain?
Or you answer, it's wrong because majority of people don't like to hurt people, and then the question is, how do you know I am not more evolved then everyone else?
You see if I only act the way I do because of the chemicals put into my brain by chance through natural selection, anything I do is not my fault, its evolution's fault for creating me this way and I have no control over what my brain does, only the illusion of free will.
With your pragmatic mind you have to understand that in your philosophy if I was to rape a 2 year old child, it is only because of the chemical reactions in my brain, nothing more, nothing less... You can try to attribute morality to the situation, however, when doing so you are only dancing to the chemicals in your brain. In your philosophy there is no morality, only appeal to majority, or appeal to self. In both cases you get logical fallacy's.
I digress but if you follow the argument further, the theory of no free will is a logical fallacy.
No. After some deliberation with one of my kids I decided I would fix salmon loaf for supper tonight. Are you proposing that Swiss steak was out of the question and that I was preordained to choose the meal I settled upon? Anything else was beyond my control? This thinking becomes a little silly don't you think? Hunger and tradition may be responsible for my decision to prepare a meal for the family tonight, but what I choose to fix is not predetermined.
Why are you interested in this discussion? Is this tied in with something you believe about God?
Why are you interested in this discussion? Is this tied in with something you believe about God?
Light bulbs do not form thoughts, they can't control limbs or escape from predators. Brains do. Something very different is taking place in a brain than in a light blub. Lightning is also electricity but you can't compare it to a brain. Maybe if you want to compare a brain that is dead to a light bulb when it is shut off? I don't know. Do technicians and programers working on artificial intelligence talk much with light bulb analogies? I don't think so.
{Great post! I'm going to break it up into pieces so the response doesn't become unwieldly}
"...just at a predetermined time or setting."
Yes, determinism begins to enter the picture.
"It would be even more analougous to compare it to artificial intelligence, where it starts out with only programmed responses, but then learns based on its environment and the responses are no longer in the control of the programmer."
Excellent! This is where the 'identical circumstances' comes in... you probably already know this, but two AI's, in identical circumstances, will produce the same 'decision'. The 'identical circumstances', of course,
means that they are both in the same state.
(if you want, we can discuss the 'random' things sometimes put into AI's... they can give the appearance that the AI has free will... I think it would be a facinating discussion, though in the end, I think we would find that the AI's 'decisions' are actually determined by previous states.)
"...I don't know if the processes are the same..."
Do you feel that there is some chance that there are different processes, rules, in your brain than in the rest of the universe?
"This doesn't really have any bearing, though, on whether you can make decisions. If these processes in you brain lead you to be able to decide between two or more options based on how you feel about certain factors, then I would say that is "free will"."
I think it has great bearing. I don't doubt that your brain can make 'decisions'... could your brain make a different decision in identical circumstances? And, maybe I should add, that 'identical circumstances' includes the state of your brain.
"...I do not know if it would be correct to say that we have free will based on your definition."
Well, of course I want to use my definition... if we change the definition part-way into the discussion, then we probably won't really resolve anything. So, now, do you (or anyone here) assert that "...I could decide to go left instead of right without any factor changing"?
[continued next post]
"...just at a predetermined time or setting."
Yes, determinism begins to enter the picture.
"It would be even more analougous to compare it to artificial intelligence, where it starts out with only programmed responses, but then learns based on its environment and the responses are no longer in the control of the programmer."
Excellent! This is where the 'identical circumstances' comes in... you probably already know this, but two AI's, in identical circumstances, will produce the same 'decision'. The 'identical circumstances', of course,
means that they are both in the same state.
(if you want, we can discuss the 'random' things sometimes put into AI's... they can give the appearance that the AI has free will... I think it would be a facinating discussion, though in the end, I think we would find that the AI's 'decisions' are actually determined by previous states.)
"...I don't know if the processes are the same..."
Do you feel that there is some chance that there are different processes, rules, in your brain than in the rest of the universe?
"This doesn't really have any bearing, though, on whether you can make decisions. If these processes in you brain lead you to be able to decide between two or more options based on how you feel about certain factors, then I would say that is "free will"."
I think it has great bearing. I don't doubt that your brain can make 'decisions'... could your brain make a different decision in identical circumstances? And, maybe I should add, that 'identical circumstances' includes the state of your brain.
"...I do not know if it would be correct to say that we have free will based on your definition."
Well, of course I want to use my definition... if we change the definition part-way into the discussion, then we probably won't really resolve anything. So, now, do you (or anyone here) assert that "...I could decide to go left instead of right without any factor changing"?
[continued next post]
{thanks for the opportunity to disgorge my opinions on this subject }
I take the phrase "all-knowing God" to mean a God that knows everything that can be known. (I prefer the wording 'much-knowing God.)
Can the future be known? I don't think so, partly because I believe I have free will (I'm speaking there as a 'faith person'. Now, if I were speaking as a 'science person', I would say we don't have free will. The future still would not be knowable, but the reason involves the word 'quantum').
Suppose God makes a prediction about tomorrow... like 'this army will be victorious'... I see that based on his estimation that he has enough power (a much-powerful God) to make it happen.
}I take the phrase "all-knowing God" to mean a God that knows everything that can be known. (I prefer the wording 'much-knowing God.)
Can the future be known? I don't think so, partly because I believe I have free will (I'm speaking there as a 'faith person'. Now, if I were speaking as a 'science person', I would say we don't have free will. The future still would not be knowable, but the reason involves the word 'quantum').
Suppose God makes a prediction about tomorrow... like 'this army will be victorious'... I see that based on his estimation that he has enough power (a much-powerful God) to make it happen.