Belief in free will is equivalent to believing in Santa Claus

The op is describing irrational choice not free will. There's no such thing as an irrational choice just one based on many or few dependencies.

So you are saying that ' that the original free will you were talking about is not free will, that we have none, right? Then you say that there is another free will, right? Does this second free will not exist either? or is it in some way realer than the first.

They both exist in their own context. However the free will I am talking about is absolute, whereas the other free will is just a useful tool/illusion. You could say it's a real illusion.

a reply to: Andy1144
Everyones life path is already written by God and agreed upon by the sinful spirit before it reincarnates.

Free will exists because God has a single and set path that will lead all lost spirits back to Him. Every split in the life path back to God is a choice between good and evil. Some wrongful choices are minor detours whilst others lead to falling off a cliff into the abyss.

Here is the kicker. Do you want to rightfully choose a path that leads to infinite pain in hell or eternal happiness where your clean spirit can one day go anywhere in the Universe with the Spirit of the Lord by your side ?

Everyone has a choice of where they want their spirit to end up on Judgement Day.

a reply to: jonnywhite

I agree with pretty much everything. I tried to make the distinction between the two free wills as they are not the same thing. That's where all of the confusion is coming from.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Andy1144

Now you say this

True, it's just a matter of one choosing to become more aligned with the hard facts or not.

Once again you invalidate yourself. You claim it is a matter of choosing to become more aligned. It there is no free will then this is no CHOOSING at all.

Yes, you're just confusing the two different free wills. On one level, you can choose, on another you can't. Depends on the context of the conversation which definition you choose. But they are two different things.

But like pink unicorns, Santa Claus IS real. It just depends at how you look at it.

Free will is a illusion that we imagine that we have. And that is true.

Religious People/christiance think they have free will. But according to the bible their future is alreay predetermined. The Bible already explaines what will take Place in the future. But still christiance think they can change it. And they seam to want to. That is odd when its all Gods will??

Our free will is ramefied by Our laws and social statues and Our beileves. Our free will is suited to fit political policy. In other Words Our free will is consatntly being groomed to fit a social political policy through Our social media.

originally posted by: Andy1144
a reply to: jonnywhite

I agree with pretty much everything. I tried to make the distinction between the two free wills as they are not the same thing. That's where all of the confusion is coming from.

Maybe it's helpful to just think of the brain as a pool table with balls on it, except each pool table has a different uneven surface and the balls have small differences too. Given the complexity of the interaction and movements of the balls, even small differences can amount to large differences in outcome. However, in any single individual, you can assign a probability for an outcome occurring given a set of circumstances, and it's reasonably accurate. It's not perfect because you can't know everything about the pool table. Each person experiences what occurs as free will or similar. You, being the ultra scientist observer, note their decision already existed prior to making it, due to the fact you can assign a probability with high confidence before a decision is made.

I've always found this link below to be interesting. I think conservation of energy is at the root of many things:
medicalxpress.com - Remembering the future: Our brain saves energy by predicting what it will see...

Probably a lot of subconscious decision making is tied to simply the brain trying to keep its energy footprint low. Lazy pos.

I've seen research suggesting just having a water fountain nearby or seeing money changes our political feelings temporarily, or how we treat each other. It's all unconscious. And of course morality:
discovermagazine.com - The Vexing Mental Tug-of-War Called Morality...

Then there're intuitive decisions. We make them all the time. I guess the ultra observor scientists aren't happy with the results:
www.goodreads.com - The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds ...

The question is can people be trained to pause and think rather than run and gun (metaphorically)? One of the researchers was hopeful.

When we're stressed, it doesn't look good for us. I guess we dig ourselves into a hole, none the more aware of our predicament:
www.nytimes.com - Brain Is a Co-Conspirator in a Vicious Stress Loop...

originally posted by: Andy1144

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Andy1144

Now you say this

True, it's just a matter of one choosing to become more aligned with the hard facts or not.

Once again you invalidate yourself. You claim it is a matter of choosing to become more aligned. It there is no free will then this is no CHOOSING at all.

Yes, you're just confusing the two different free wills. On one level, you can choose, on another you can't. Depends on the context of the conversation which definition you choose. But they are two different things.

I don't know as I am confusing anything, but I must admit I do not grasp your concepts here. I determine the concept of free will in an absolute sense. You say there is no free will in an absolute sense, but then go on to say that there is free will in a, what, smaller context? Or is that other 'free will' not really free will but just an illusion of free will and so why call it free will at all.

Now I give you that the manner in which we have believed in free will for ages and ages now appears to be being overthrown by modern neuro-sciences and psychologies, so I am supposing that this may be the 'other' free will you mention. But the absolute free will that you deny as existing depends upon a totally mechanistic evaluation of reality, one in which each and every cog fits with no volition apart from any possible volition in the nature of the total and absolute reality itself. And all of that is predicated upon a simple illusion that we humans are capable of comprehending the totality of reality from our very small and limited experience of it in the first place. Making absolute statements must be based upon absolute cognizance, something that I at least seem to be rather short of.
.

originally posted by: Tristran
a reply to: Andy1144
Everyones life path is already written by God and agreed upon by the sinful spirit before it reincarnates.

Free will exists because God has a single and set path that will lead all lost spirits back to Him. Every split in the life path back to God is a choice between good and evil. Some wrongful choices are minor detours whilst others lead to falling off a cliff into the abyss.

Here is the kicker. Do you want to rightfully choose a path that leads to infinite pain in hell or eternal happiness where your clean spirit can one day go anywhere in the Universe with the Spirit of the Lord by your side ?

Everyone has a choice of where they want their spirit to end up on Judgement Day.

Threatening people with an eternity in hell can def have an effect on their free will. It basically scares them into compliance. You should be ashamed. But i know your will has been stripped from you by those who indoctrinated you into fulfilling their wishes instead of living your own life.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

It can get confusing when we start using the same words but assign them a different meaning. So basically, by absolute free will, I mean the one I claim we don't have. The other, is an illusion. But we still have it. We have it as an illusion, get it? It doesn't ultimately exist but it's there. In other cases we can speak about this other free will as if it does exist, for functional purposes.

So for example, if I say "You have to choose to study more in school". This statement is both true and false depending on the context. It is untrue from the absolute, and true from the other definition of free will. That's why the contradiction happens.

I make this an absolute statement, the same way I can know beyond a shadow of doubt that I can't be conscious of being unconscious. It's an absolute fact. Saying there is absolute free will is like saying there is such thing as an experience of unconsciousness, which we both know can't happen. If I had absolute free will, I would be able find me doing it. But when I look at what I am, I am completely making choices off of processes which are completely out of my control. Even choosing to make a choice is out of control. I can clearly see in my experience, without a shadow of doubt, that there is no free will. So I have both a logical and experiential validation. That's why I am so confident of calling it absolute.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Whether our decisions are already determined before the big bang or not, there would still be no room for absolute free will. Because the law of the universe is cause and effect. Nothing can't cause something. The same way you can't be conscious of being unconscious. They are absolute facts.

Actually it's more like believing that the sun goes around the Earth. It certainly seems like the sun goes around the Earth, but science tells us otherwise.

originally posted by: Andy1144
a reply to: jonnywhite

Whether our decisions are already determined before the big bang or not, there would still be no room for absolute free will. Because the law of the universe is cause and effect. Nothing can't cause something. The same way you can't be conscious of being unconscious. They are absolute facts.

Sure... if you ignore indeterminism observed in nature.

If what you say is true, then you're just an avatar preaching to a mindless crowd. Your mind is an illusion. This all means nothing. And I was only ever going to say this.

What I find peculiar is that you believe that some people have absolutely no choice but to tell you that we have free will.

In a universe without free will, there could never an argument be commenced against it. It wouldn't be considered, for the inevitable result would be a pointless circular debate whose end is to discover there is no free will - and then the big crunch; and repeat.

Glad I don't live in that really pointless universe. But I know why you want to - you're never guilty.

If only science ever spoke. Then we'd maybe know its opinion on any matter.

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: Andy1144
a reply to: jonnywhite

Whether our decisions are already determined before the big bang or not, there would still be no room for absolute free will. Because the law of the universe is cause and effect. Nothing can't cause something. The same way you can't be conscious of being unconscious. They are absolute facts.

Sure... if you ignore indeterminism observed in nature.

One thing I find so interesting is that the Double Slit works even though God is observing.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I've never seen anyone scared of Hell.

Now of the truth of the consequences of their actions... That I have seen.

Everyone who has rejected God doesn't fear Hell and everyone who hasn't rejected God therefore doesn't fear Hell.

That never converts.

Now to be dragged out of personal Hell... That works.

a reply to: Andy1144

"Hey Billy, wanna go to the five and dime with me?"
"I ain't got no money."
"I didn't ask you if you had money, I asked you if you wanted to go with me."

"Will you buy me something?"
"I don't want to, but I will."

"C'mon, let's go!"
"Never mind, I changed my mind."

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: Andy1144

"Hey Billy, wanna go to the five and dime with me?"
"I ain't got no money."
"I didn't ask you if you had money, I asked you if wanted to go with me."

"Will you buy me something?"
"I don't want to, but I will."

"C'mon, let's go!"
"Never mind, I changed my mind."

Andy does seem to fail to realize that people aren't playing chess against eachother just to wait and see what the inevitable result is - we're trying to force our result.

This doesn't mean the result is not inevitable to a mind which can see all - it simply means that for those of us who aren't God, we win and lose on merit. Those with God win on God's merit and lose within His will.

This does not get rid of our will, albeit limited; for there would be no purpose in the charade of justice to prove to drones that justice exists. What a pointless little play that would be. Why have justice at all if no one is guilty?