The Standard Argument Against Free Will (TSAAFW)

Author: 3RU7AL ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 114
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    "If you know not, then you can say not that it's linear." - this is a classic appeal to ignorance.

    An appeal to ignorance is commonly used to defend unfalsifiable claims (like bigfootspacealiens).

    Here's the problem.

    There are only two possible options.

    (EITHER)

    (1) your thoughts (and actions) are contextual (caused by previous experiences, including your biology).

    (OR)

    (2) your thoughts (and actions) are random (uncaused by any previous experiences).

    If you pick #1, then your thoughts (and actions) relate to your memory and the world around you (contextual). This means your thoughts (and actions) are potentially USEFUL TO YOU AND OR OTHERS.

    If you pick #2, then your thoughts (and actions) don't necessarily relate to anything at all. And as a matter of fact, statistically, it would be extremely unlikely that any RANDOM thought or action would be even remotely or incidentally USEFUL TO YOU AND OR OTHERS.

    Now you might try to mix the two options, some caused, some uncaused, and that's fine.

    Your useful thoughts and actions MUST BE CAUSED.

    YOur "free" thoughts and actions are TAUTOLOGICALLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE (99.999% of the time).

    SOURCE CONVO
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,847
    4
    7
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    wrong

  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @3RU7AL
    Your dichotomy is false.

    (2) your thoughts (and actions) are random (uncaused by any previous experiences).
    Just because thoughts may be uncaused by any previous experiences, does not necessarily make them random.
  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 8,047
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @3RU7AL
    Free will does not actually imply random, because free will always operates in a set of circumstances. Random would imply a disregard for circumstances in action.

    Choice is not random. 


    It is a fact that our experience is largely one of choices. If we deny that we are making choices, we have made ourselves into slaves. Into robots.

    That isn't what it means to be human. Part of being truly human is to accept responsibility for our actions and embrace the suffering that is required to live virtuously



  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    Just because thoughts may be uncaused by any previous experiences, does not necessarily make them random.
    Please explain to me the difference between uncaused and random.

    Perhaps you can provide an example of something that is uncaused and not random.

    Perhaps you can provide an example of something that is random and not uncaused.
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    wrong
    Please explain.
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @Mopac
    Random would imply a disregard for circumstances in action.

    Choice is not random. 
    I agree 100%
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @Mopac
    That isn't what it means to be human.
    A robot can still be responsible for its actions.

    In the same way a dog can still be responsible for its actions.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @3RU7AL
    Please explain to me the difference between uncaused and random.
    I can program my computer to flash a light randomly, but the flashes are not uncaused.

    Perhaps you can provide an example of something that is uncaused and not random.
    God is uncaused and not random.

    Perhaps you can provide an example of something that is random and not uncaused.
    The flashing lights on my computer. Semantics is fun no?
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    I can program my computer to flash a light randomly, but the flashes are not uncaused.
    Computers can only generate pseudo random light flashes.

  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    God is uncaused and not random.
    Please explain your definition of "god" to the best of your ability.

164 days later

  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    God is uncaused and not random.
    Please explain your definition of "god" to the best of your ability.

  • simplybeourselves
    simplybeourselves avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 128
    0
    2
    6
    simplybeourselves avatar
    simplybeourselves
    Very strange way of putting it.

    A simpler way of putting it is that it is already accepted that Libertarianism is incompatible with determinism but indeterminism doesn't help Libertarianism either because indeterminism means that we can't determine our own actions. Libertarianism would require a sort of ultimate SELF-determinism rather than merely an absence of OTHER-determinism.

    And a person whose actions are ultimately self-determined is a person who would have to be the cause of themselves infinitely. An infinite regress would happen of a sort even problematic for God because it's disputed whether actual infinites are even metaphysically possible at all let alone possible for mere human beings.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,298
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @3RU7AL
    ..."Please explain your definition of "god" to the best of your ability."...


    The best of his ability is lame, at best. :--(

    "G"od = "U"niverse and the italized is specific to metaphysical-1 below in the Cosmic Trinity: most wholistically comprehensive set

    1} metaphysical-1 aka spirit-1, is mind/intellect/concepts ex concepts of mind, intellect, concepts, Space, God, Universe, TIme,iDogs Cats, toyota's etc.

    ---------------conceptual line-of-demarcation-------------------------------------------------------

    2} metaphysical-2, macro-infinite non-occupied Space that surrounds/embraces the following,

    3}  finite, occupied space Universe aka God and Uni--V--erse aka  spirit-2, 3 and 4 as follows

    ......3a} spirit-2 is fermions and bosons ergo quantised and quantified, Observed Time and directly associated with a sine-wave patterned /\/\/\/ frequency, that collectively accumulate as atoms, molecules, planets etc,

    ......3b} metaphysical-3 aka spirit-3,  Gravity ---speculativly positive shaped Space (  ) associated with outer geodesic of a torus,

    .......3c} metaphysical-4 aka spirit-4, Dark Energy ---speculatively negative shaped Space )( associated with inner geodesic of a torus.


    Uni-- = contractive { mass-attractive/contractive  } Gravity (  )

    --V-- =inversions from outer peak of positive and inner of negative curvature f torus ergo (><)(><), and these two sets of inversion result in a sine-wave pattern inside the tube of torus that is numerical signified as 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 etc and happens to coincide with not a  sine-wave frequency pattern of reality, but trinity of quarks, electrons and neutrinos aka fermionic matter,

    --erse = Dark Energy { disspersive/dissasociative } aka negative shaped )( geodesisc of torus

    i = ego aka metaphysical-1 along with mind/intellect/concepts i.e concept of self ergo outside of beyond  ---tho not spatially, as is non-occupied Space--  the torus  (>*<)  i  (>*<),

    * * = bilateral consciousness with human female being the most complex entity of Universe  --barring sets of one or more women or men ex a whole planet of humans is of course more complex than a single woman.

    Unlike many around here, I actually like to follow a rational, logical common sense pathway to truth, that, is based on observation and speculative intuition.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    Please explain to me the difference between uncaused and random.
    I can program my computer to flash a light randomly, but the flashes are not uncaused.

    Computers can only generate pseudo random light flashes.
    What is "pseudo random"? Random is having no set pattern, occurring unpredictably. Uncaused is having no precipitator. A computer can be programmed to behave truly randomly. Today's AI is what makes this possible.

    God is uncaused and not random.

    Please explain your definition of "god" to the best of your ability.
    My definition of God is irrelevant to my argument that He is uncaused. Maybe you meant to ask me, "How is God uncaused?" My purpose was to show you the difference between "random" and "uncaused". I do not care to go into yet another argument of " Does God exist?" With a materialist.

    I've differentiated between "random" and "uncaused", if you disagree, say why using logic. Definitions of God are just diversions from the topic. I have not asked you for definitions of "random" and "uncaused". Do you know why? Because I am sincere and am assuming you are also sincerely using the common Orthodox meanings of those words.

    Your dichotomy is false.
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,679
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @3RU7AL @ethang5
    An uncaused GOD is an impossibility, so therefore false within the context of an uncaused GOD

    An ongoing GOD principle is an ongoing possibility, but this just conveniently allows us to avoid the impossible.....Just as theists such as Mr Ethan always conveniently don't feel the need to define an imaginary GOD.

    Ans something that is programmed is therefore not random, no matter how random it might appear to be.

    And by our very nature we are all materialists.
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5 @zedvictor4
    And something that is programmed is therefore not random, no matter how random it might appear to be.
    100%

    The most "random" a computer can manage is lava-lamps. 

    I'm not kidding, the world's most prestigious cyber-security firms use lava-lamps to generate their pseudo-random seeds.

    Now do you believe the movement of lava-lamp is "uncaused"?

    Do you believe a lava-lamp has FREEWILL??

    No, it's just wax and water and heat.  It's just a highly complex system that makes it VERY difficult to predict. 

    IT IS NOT TRULY-RANDOM.

    UNPREDICTABILITY =/= FREEWILL

    UNPREDICTABILITY =/= RANDOM
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,298
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @ethang5
    ..."I do not care to go into yet another argument of " Does God exist?" With a materialist."...

    Does anyone here no what a materialist is?  Or what that has do with God/Universe?

    No?  I didnt think so.  Just mumbo jumbo to evade the facts that it is all mumbo jumbo coming from the materialist finger tips of ethang5. Old news.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,298
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @zedvictor4
    .."Ans something that is programmed is therefore not random, no matter how random it might appear to be."..

    Yay! FInally were getting some more rational, logical common sense out of you.  About time.  its been hard as pulling wisdom teeth without pain killer. ;--)
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @3RU7AL @ebuc @zedvictor4
    @Z

    An uncaused GOD is an impossibility,...
    I am aware your fingers can type these words, what I want to see is the logic that formed them.

    Just as theists such as Mr Ethan always conveniently don't feel the need to define an imaginary GOD.
    I define terms when it is necessary for my argument, I do not allow diversions every time an atheist defaults to his God obsession. When the topic is God, I will supply a definition.

    ...something that is programmed is therefore not random, no matter how random it might appear to be.
    Atheist with article again. Your word "something" above, to what does it refer? The random values are NOT what is programmed, the system that generates them are. But your statement equivocates on what "something" refers to, seeming to refer to what is generated instead of what does the generation.

    I will accept that the poverty of you knowledge about computer technology and the meaning of "random" is what accounts for your inability to understand. And as your understanding is not necessary for my argument to be true, I remain satisfied.

    ...by our very nature we are all materialists.
    We were born materialists, we can become other things. Learning and growth are the enemies of stagnation and bias.

    @B

    Now do you believe the movement of lava-lamp is "uncaused"?
    No. I believe the movement of a lava-lamp is random. The definition of random would help you.

    Do you believe a lava-lamp has FREEWILL??
    No. Perhaps you should explain what free will has to do with our current argument.

    UNPREDICTABILITY =/= FREEWILL
    No one has said it did.

    UNPREDICTABILITY =/= RANDOM
    Unpredictability is bound up in the definition of "random". Please look it up. You really need to define your terms.

    @E

    Does anyone here no what a materialist is?  Or what that has do with God/we?
    Brutal brought it up. Ask him.

    Just mumbo jumbo to evade the facts that it is all mumbo jumbo coming from the materialist finger tips of ethang5.
    Ethan is not a materialist. Your poor reading comprehension has caused you to stumble again.

    FInally were getting some more rational, logical common sense out of you.  About time.  its been hard as pulling wisdom teeth without pain killer. ;--)
    Note Zed, when you commit a logical fallacy, our genius calls it "rational, logical common sense". An easy way to determine if you've been logical is to see if Cube agrees with you. If he has, your argument needs to go back into the oven.

    The Oxford English Dictionary defines "random" as "Having no definite aim or purpose; not sent or guided in a particular direction; made, done, occurring, etc., without method or conscious choice; haphazard."

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness#:~:text=Individual%20random%20events%20are%20by,%22trials%22)%20is%20predictable.&text=In%20statistics%2C%20a%20random%20variable,outcome%20of%20an%20event%20space.
    In the common parlance, randomness is the apparent lack of pattern or predictability in events. A random sequence of events, symbols or steps often has no order and does not follow an intelligible pattern or combination. Individual random events are by definition unpredictable, but since they often follow a probability distribution, the frequency of different outcomes over numerous events (or "trials") is predictable.

    Randomness Is Unpredictability
    Article in The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
    I propose that randomness is to be understood as a special case of the epistemic concept of the unpredictability of a process. This proposal arguably captures the intuitive desiderata for the concept of randomness;

  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    > Unpredictability is bound up in the definition of "random". Please look it up. You really need to define your terms.

    ran•dom răn′dəm

    • adj.
      Having no specific pattern, purpose, or objective: synonymchance.



    The weather was once thought to be "unpredictable" (Having no specific pattern, purpose, or objective).

    And as it turns out, our inability to predict the weather was simply a function of our lack of understanding.

    Weather patterns are the result of highly complex patterns of cause and effect (just like lava-lamps).

    RANDOM =/= FREEWILL

    NON-RANDOM = DETERMINISM (CAUSE AND EFFECT)

    Apparent unpredictability is not a sufficient definition of RANDOM.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @3RU7AL
    The weather was once thought to be "unpredictable"...
    How is that pertinent?

    And as it turns out, our inability to predict the weather was simply a function of our lack of understanding.
    Again, how is this pertinent?

    RANDOM =/= FREEWILL
    Again. No one has claimed that "random" = "freewill". Please address the rebuttals given to you and stop countering claims no one has made. You are being irrational.

    Apparent unpredictability is not a sufficient definition of RANDOM.
    Don't be dishonest. I gave the definition of random. I said, "Unpredictability is bound up in the definition of "random". " I did not say it was the definition of random.

    Wikipedia agrees - In the common parlance, randomness is the apparent lack of pattern or predictability in events.

    The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science agrees - ...randomness is to be understood as a special case of the epistemic concept of the unpredictability.
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,361
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @ethang5
    Why are you insisting on a colloquial definition of RANDOM, if not in defense of FREEWILL?

    Are you accusing yourself of being "off-topic"?
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,298
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @ethang5
    ..."Ethan is not a materialist. Your poor reading comprehension has caused you to stumble again."..

    You have no idea what the word "materialist" means aergo you have no idea if your are one or not nd you are the person who brought the word into conversation. Ethangs walks in fear of truth.

    ethang = meaningless mumbo jumbo

    Universe = God = occupied space.  My ego is not afraid of truth ergo I post it.  Your ego fears truth.

    All occupied space is cause > effect > resultant. Old news.








  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @3RU7AL
    Why are you insisting on a colloquial definition of RANDOM,...
    I am not. I gave you the orthodox and classical definition of "random" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Please resist the urge to be dishonest.

    ...if not in defense of FREEWILL?
    You are attempting to use an incorrect definition of "random" to invalidate free will. Before we van discuss free will, we must first dispense with your fallacious use of "random".

    Are you accusing yourself of being "off-topic"?
    Lol. It's like the only way you know to debate is by smarmy deflection. Stop dodging questions and address the points put to you.

    The Oxford English Dictionary defines "random" as "Having no definite aim or purpose; not sent or guided in a particular direction; made, done, occurring, etc., without method or conscious choice; haphazard."

    Unpredictability is implied in the definition of "random". Thus, your dichotomy is false. And you still have not told us what "pseudo random" is.