Does Free Will exist?

[LycanSpectre]

This is a question my Philosophy class is examining. Do we have free will? Are we responsible for our decisions? Are we in control, or do outside influences rule our existence? Is every decision we make merely a result of warring desires? Is the subcounscious using the idea of free will as a tool to justify its decisions to our conscious selves?

What is your take on all this?

I think that, yes, we do have free will. You dont always do the things you want, do you? We have the ability to choose what we do, but outside influences will try to bend and shape our choices. While we are ultimatly responsible for our decisons and actions, there are outside forces which influence us.

[GoddessWolf]

Everyone is born with free will, but it what people do with that free will that causes problems. Childhood influences such as parents or siblings, perhaps calssmates or friends can twist this free will. Sort of like seeing someone do something wrong, but getting away with it. Children learn early on what is right and wrong, but if they are taught the opposite from birth, or see others get away with things they normally couldn't, then yes they still have free will, but that free will has been bended by what they have learned or seen. So their free will would be centered around others influence.

Thats not always the case however. Someone could grow up in the worst situation but come out the better person. This would be determination and a highly active conscious. Outside influences don't always win.

Sometimes we do things that are not of our own free will. Anger, agression, hatred, are all fuel to a fire that can spark an inferno. In other words, we can do things, be aware of them, but another emmotion rules us, and we are hardly aware of whats happened until it's done and over with. It's still free will, but as if it is someone else doing it at the time. We are blind to whats happening.

Free will is something everyone has, but it's easily twisted and corrupted. People have to be stronger and know what is truly right and wrong. It all boils down to influences in the long run. Ive heard a saying before thats it not what you know, but who you know. Free will is a classic example of this statement.

[GhostBat]

For starters...HURRAY for the new Philosophy section!!! :D

On the topic at hand...I believe that free will does exist. Although atmosphere and experiences shape us into what we are, or will be, that in no way takes away our free will. Each person is able to make their own choices, throughout their life, even simple ones such as what to eat for breakfast.

Everyone has responsibility for their actions. To say they had no blame in doing wrong because they were raised poorly is no excuse.

[Hellcat]

For starters...HURRAY for the new Philosophy section!!! :D

On the topic at hand...I believe that free will does exist. Although atmosphere and experiences shape us into what we are, or will be, that in no way takes away our free will. Each person is able to make their own choices, throughout their life, even simple ones such as what to eat for breakfast.

Everyone has responsibility for their actions. To say they had no blame in doing wrong because they were raised poorly is no excuse.

Yeah free will exists- I put this post here because I wanted to. On the other hand if our entire existence is already subconciously preplanned then I would have had to post this message here anyway. Although the fact that i type here hasn't (to my knowledge) had much effect on my life, I do believe that my actions will have an influence on somebody else. For example, I wouldn't have typed here at all if the thread hadn't been started. Somebody may continue this thread further and thus my typing here may have influenced them to do so. Our actions are constantly influenced by other people, not just ourselves- everybody is always teaching somebody else something new even if its something as simple as an alternative perspective to a subject. So the fact that i type here may mean that someone is learning something (maybe argumentative skills who knows) therefore I'm doing something i wasn't aware of- thus it might be discribed as not my own free will (I didn't willing teach any body anything), but by the result of my actions. Who knows how many lives you may have saved because you stopped somebody in the street, and despite the fact that somebody really didn't want to stand there listening to you rabbiting on about your grandads bowel problem, and came up with an excuse to get away 3 seconds later, in that few seconds of stalling them you may have prevented them from stepping out of the road in time to get hit by the lorry that splashed a huge puddle up your £400 trousers as it sped by while you were rabbiting on to that poor innocent individual about your grandads bowel problem. Do we really have free will or are we subconciously teaching everybody something (when we are not subconsciously saving their lives). If free will really exists how can precognition be eplained? Surely if free will exists, nobody would have a notion of the 6th sense cos no-one would (theoretically) have a clue what is going to happen next subconsciously or otherwise. I'm not implying free will doesn't exist (I really don't know) I'm just throwing another idea at you all to see where it will go.

[Hellcat]

Everyone has responsibility for their actions. To say they had no blame in doing wrong because they were raised poorly is no excuse.


This is true, most people are brought up with some notion of what is right and what is wrong, but that is learned behaviour. Not instinct. Do new born babies cry of there own free will? I imagine not, the first hunger cry is established (probably) by the pain in their tiny stomach we call hunger- the cry was a response to discomfort not because the baby decided, 'oh hum, I think I'll cry now'. Of course it doesn't take babies long to learn that when they cry they get food, and crying will become a response to learning, and now they have the power to cry not just in response to pain, but to get a reaction- Perhaps free will, is something that is born with learning. When you have learned something, you have the will power to use it either for good or bad.

[LycanSpectre]

Perhahps free will comes with sentience? A package deal?

[LycanSpectre]

Here is a paper I did for my Philosophy class (Its only the 3rd day fo class and I have a paper due!! ARGH!!! :banghead: )

Anyway, the topic of this paper is to show why Free Will does NOT exist using an argument suppiled by John Hospers in a textbook called 20 Questions. This guy is pretty heavy into psychoanylysis. I hope this can be used to further a stimulating discussion.


The best argument against free will was presented by John Hospers in his publication Meaning and Free Will. According to Dr. Hospers free will is an illusion created by the Ego to justify the demands of the Id and Superego. The Id acts as a person’s self serving side, it always wants something NOW. The Superego is the part of every person that shoots them down, that person’s worst critic. It’s job is to say no to the Id. The Ego acts as the mediator between the Id and Superego, always creating compromise between the two. Free will is the unconscious Ego’s tool to justify the compromise it makes.
Take the example of the abusive friend presented by Dr. Hospers: a young university student possesses everything needed to be popular. This student always takes a social misstep somewhere in his relations with his friends, offending them. The Id wants friends and fulfillment immediately, but the Superego will not allow that. So the Ego compromises by allowing the student to have friends, and to be kind and considerate most of the time. Occasionally he will make a cold and calculated remark to one of his friends, making them angry. This is the influence of the Superego. The student did not realize that his remark would cause pain for another, but the Superego did; in fact, that was its intention. When the friend acts coldly to the student, the student feels slighted.
Dr. Hospers uses this example to argue that our conscious selves are not in control of our actions. The Id and Superego war in our unconscious selves for control, and our actions are the compromise of the two sides. Dr. Hospers portrays the Superego as our masochistic sides, which is why its intent was to cause pain for the student’s friend; it had calculated that the friend would behave coldly to the student later. This makes the student assume the role of victim; he does not consciously know why his friend is being cold to him, and can thusly state that he is the one who was wronged. This allows him to say that it was not his fault, and can feel good about his self. This suits the purposes of the Id and Superego: the student feels positive regard for his self (satisfies the Id), and has hurt himself by detracting from the Id’s original desire, which was to have close friends and fulfilling relationships (satisfies the Superego). However, to everyone else, it appeared to be a conscious, free decision to make that remark.
In a more general sense, a person can be compelled to do something by their unconscious due to their past. Environment, parents, and fears (conscious or unconscious) can all be used by the Superego to provoke a response from the Id. By presenting things like parental admonitions form childhood, past fears, and painful lessons in a biting, taunting manner, the Superego can provoke the Id to do something to maintain unconditional positive regard for self. To illustrate, we shall examine the example Dr. Hospers presented of the man who was compelled to constantly wash his hands. The superego is likely presenting that man’s unconscious with a message that is harmful to himself; memory of a parent scolding him for having dirty hands, a fear of germs, or memory of a nasty infection from not washing his hands often enough. All these create a fear in that man, causing the Id to act in such a way as to make the man feel justified about his self, and hence maintain positive regard for self. As a compromise, the Ego compels the man to constantly wash his hands in response to his unconscious fears. The illusion of free will exists in the sense that it is a conscious decision to go and wash his hands. The man may convince himself that they are dirty, or feel so, in order to justify his actions. However, the man’s decision was already made for him by his unconscious. All he had to do was justify it.

[Hellcat]

Here is a paper I did for my Philosophy class (Its only the 3rd day fo class and I have a paper due!! ARGH!!! :banghead: )

Anyway, the topic of this paper is to show why Free Will does NOT exist using an argument suppiled by John Hospers in a textbook called 20 Questions. This guy is pretty heavy into psychoanylysis. I hope this can be used to further a stimulating discussion.


The best argument against free will was presented by John Hospers in his publication Meaning and Free Will. According to Dr. Hospers free will is an illusion created by the Ego to justify the demands of the Id and Superego. The Id acts as a person’s self serving side, it always wants something NOW. The Superego is the part of every person that shoots them down, that person’s worst critic. It’s job is to say no to the Id. The Ego acts as the mediator between the Id and Superego, always creating compromise between the two. Free will is the unconscious Ego’s tool to justify the compromise it makes.
Take the example of the abusive friend presented by Dr. Hospers: a young university student possesses everything needed to be popular. This student always takes a social misstep somewhere in his relations with his friends, offending them. The Id wants friends and fulfillment immediately, but the Superego will not allow that. So the Ego compromises by allowing the student to have friends, and to be kind and considerate most of the time. Occasionally he will make a cold and calculated remark to one of his friends, making them angry. This is the influence of the Superego. The student did not realize that his remark would cause pain for another, but the Superego did; in fact, that was its intention. When the friend acts coldly to the student, the student feels slighted.
Dr. Hospers uses this example to argue that our conscious selves are not in control of our actions. The Id and Superego war in our unconscious selves for control, and our actions are the compromise of the two sides. Dr. Hospers portrays the Superego as our masochistic sides, which is why its intent was to cause pain for the student’s friend; it had calculated that the friend would behave coldly to the student later. This makes the student assume the role of victim; he does not consciously know why his friend is being cold to him, and can thusly state that he is the one who was wronged. This allows him to say that it was not his fault, and can feel good about his self. This suits the purposes of the Id and Superego: the student feels positive regard for his self (satisfies the Id), and has hurt himself by detracting from the Id’s original desire, which was to have close friends and fulfilling relationships (satisfies the Superego). However, to everyone else, it appeared to be a conscious, free decision to make that remark.
In a more general sense, a person can be compelled to do something by their unconscious due to their past. Environment, parents, and fears (conscious or unconscious) can all be used by the Superego to provoke a response from the Id. By presenting things like parental admonitions form childhood, past fears, and painful lessons in a biting, taunting manner, the Superego can provoke the Id to do something to maintain unconditional positive regard for self. To illustrate, we shall examine the example Dr. Hospers presented of the man who was compelled to constantly wash his hands. The superego is likely presenting that man’s unconscious with a message that is harmful to himself; memory of a parent scolding him for having dirty hands, a fear of germs, or memory of a nasty infection from not washing his hands often enough. All these create a fear in that man, causing the Id to act in such a way as to make the man feel justified about his self, and hence maintain positive regard for self. As a compromise, the Ego compels the man to constantly wash his hands in response to his unconscious fears. The illusion of free will exists in the sense that it is a conscious decision to go and wash his hands. The man may convince himself that they are dirty, or feel so, in order to justify his actions. However, the man’s decision was already made for him by his unconscious. All he had to do was justify it.

That is a really interesting piece. It reminds me of a comic, I can't remember which, but there is a boy who has an angel sat on one shoulder and a devil sat on the other. The angel is telling him to do one thing and the devil is telling him to do something else, so the kid is always at war with himself.

I've never read any philosophy pieces before, but i d spend a lot of time thinking about stupid things that aren't really important- it gives my brain something to chew on. Er don't suppose you know of any good philosophy books?

[LycanSpectre]

That is a really interesting piece. It reminds me of a comic, I can't remember which, but there is a boy who has an angel sat on one shoulder and a devil sat on the other. The angel is telling him to do one thing and the devil is telling him to do something else, so the kid is always at war with himself.

I've never read any philosophy pieces before, but i d spend a lot of time thinking about stupid things that aren't really important- it gives my brain something to chew on. Er don't suppose you know of any good philosophy books?

Er... not really. :shrug: There are always the books by the old dead dudes, but most people find those to be sooo boring. That 20 Questions text I got for my class is OK, It covers modern philosophy as well as some older philosophy. But as for books I've read, there arent that many. The only one I can recall off the top of my head is The Art Of War by Sun Tzu. I'll start a thread in the Books section asking for good philosophy books tho. :)

[Hellcat]

I'm not sure about superego, ego, ID thing. It's a bit confusing. Surely the individuals personailty is created by a mixture of genes passed down from the parents etc, and personal experiences? I have a phobia of moths, I'm terrified- its totally irrational you'll agree. Why am I frightened of moths? It's something I learned, partly from my mother and partly from experience. 1) My mum doesn't like moths, she's not terrified of them, she just hates them. 2) When i was a child a well camoflaged moth flew in my face, it scared me. Now I subconcsiously associate 'fluttery, mottled' wings with the fear I felt when i was scared by one as a child and my hatred comes from my learned behaviour from my mum. So where does the ego, superego etc. come into my response when I rapidly vacate and area that contains a moth? I consciously know that moths can't hurt me, yet when i see one I am hit by the natural response to danger, in this case flight rather than fight

[blueeyes]

Free will is a lie people tell themselves to keep sane. It's only an excuse humans make to relay their own decisions and to make themselves seem not only more aware, but more important as well.
All decisions we make result only from the chemical and electrical impulses within our brains (short term decisions, all of which are reactionary) or from previous experience (long term decisions). Occasionally, a random, creative, thought will arise, but that is the exception rather to the rule, and still is not the focus of our abilities.
I say this not to condone any actions, but simply to acknoledge my weaknesses.

[LycanSpectre]

So where does the ego, superego etc. come into my response when I rapidly vacate and area that contains a moth?

Ok. Fear is an unplesent emotion, and one of Nature's best teachers, right up there with pain. So this moth scared you, which teaches you to watch out for them, so that they don't scare you again. Couple that with your mother's persistaint example of not likeing moths, and you have a recepie for a moth phobia, especially if all this happened during childhood, like you said.

However, this sounds more like a conditioned response than a subcounsious war to me. Lets try to apply the Id, ego and superego anyway. Lets make Freud proud! :D

ID: Wants you to be calm, peaceful, and happy. Which means not afraid, excited, or angry.

Superego: Cant let you just walk around humming all day, so it grabs your subcounscious and says "LOOK! WE'RE AFRAID!!!"

Ego: Compromises. You feel fear, but you do something to restore calm and peace. The Ego could be driving you to leave the room, smash the moth, look away, etc.

[Hellcat]

Ok. Fear is an unplesent emotion, and one of Nature's best teachers, right up there with pain. So this moth scared you, which teaches you to watch out for them, so that they don't scare you again. Couple that with your mother's persistaint example of not likeing moths, and you have a recepie for a moth phobia, especially if all this happened during childhood, like you said.

However, this sounds more like a conditioned response than a subcounsious war to me. Lets try to apply the Id, ego and superego anyway. Lets make Freud proud! :D

ID: Wants you to be calm, peaceful, and happy. Which means not afraid, excited, or angry.

Superego: Cant let you just walk around humming all day, so it grabs your subcounscious and says "LOOK! WE'RE AFRAID!!!"

Ego: Compromises. You feel fear, but you do something to restore calm and peace. The Ego could be driving you to leave the room, smash the moth, look away, etc.

Where's the compromise in that? I'm okay with the moth, I hate moth, but moth not so bad cos its not moving, I'm calm (not). Everythings cool (really..I think). -This is free will, this is me trying to be big in front of the big but insignificant BIG moth (I'd call that ego!)

Moth moves- I'm not even thinking about trying to be calm I've already left the room. (which suggests that my free will has been over ruled by my subconscious)- this is twisted common sense (twisted in the fact that my responses are irrational, but common sense if the creature really was threatening and I wanted to stay alive.

Superego wants me to be afraid? Why? this superego thing sounds like a form of split personality (we could diverge the philosphy here and go onto the subject of split personailty, but lets not!) That's like saying that everone has more than one persona residing within his/her mind

[LycanSpectre]

Superego wants me to be afraid? Why? this superego thing sounds like a form of split personality (we could diverge the philosphy here and go onto the subject of split personailty, but lets not!) That's like saying that everone has more than one persona residing within his/her mind

Thats why its subconscious. If it was conscious, then it would be very simlar to split personalities. But Im no expert psychologist, I know is that the Id and Superego are always in opposition to one another. And like I said, I'm not sure psychoanalysis really applies that well to your example.

The point of that paper was to show that it is possible for our subcounscious to be driving us, and using free will as a tool.

[Hellcat]

Thats why its subconscious. If it was conscious, then it would be very simlar to split personalities. But Im no expert psychologist, I know is that the Id and Superego are always in opposition to one another. And like I said, I'm not sure psychoanalysis really applies that well to your example.

The point of that paper was to show that it is possible for our subcounscious to be driving us, and using free will as a tool.

Yeah, that bit I agree with. What i can't understand is why we have a conscious, if the subconsious is doing the work than why is the conscious (or Id) important?

[LycanSpectre]

Yeah, that bit I agree with. What i can't understand is why we have a conscious, if the subconsious is doing the work than why is the conscious (or Id) important?

I have no absolute answer. Consciousness could just be a side effect of having a sub-conscious. But I suspect something else.

In the day to day tasks of survival, the subcounscious is ill equipped to act on its decisions; it cannot make a descision on its own without the mediating influence of the Ego (which has components in both the counscious and subcounscious.) If it were left up to the subcounscious, I think we wouldn't be able to decide on wether to eat or procreate. Conciousness is the more practical part of a person; the influence that goes "OK guys, stop bickering, lets get some drive thru, we can procreate later." And so makes something happen, rather than just thinking about it.

[Hellcat]

I have no absolute answer. Consciousness could just be a side effect of having a sub-conscious. But I suspect something else.

In the day to day tasks of survival, the subcounscious is ill equipped to act on its decisions; it cannot make a descision on its own without the mediating influence of the Ego (which has components in both the counscious and subcounscious.) If it were left up to the subcounscious, I think we wouldn't be able to decide on wether to eat or procreate. Conciousness is the more practical part of a person; the influence that goes "OK guys, stop bickering, lets get some drive thru, we can procreate later." And so makes something happen, rather than just thinking about it.

I'm kinda thinking that subconscious and conscious are realated. Let me give you an example. Lets say a child is born, and from that moment of birth it has no learned behaviour, it doesn't learn to cry to get a reaction. It doesn't learn anything, because we haven't given it Free Will, consiousness or sub consiousness. We able Free Will at which point there is no learned behaviour so the natural response of Free Will, is to learn. The baby (lets say its a bit older so it can actually do something)..the child picks up an egg (no reasoning envolved, it just did) why did the child pick it up? The child won't know, it just did it. So we could say it was a subconsious act without reasoning, but it was free will. The child now has learned what an egg feels like. The child drops the egg, the egg breaks. The child has now learned that when you drop an egg it breaks. The next time a child picks up an egg, the child has the power to choose wether or not to break the egg- it becomes conscious to decisions. Now we could imply that the consious is awaken the minute a new born baby learns something. Maybe the consious is our key to learning, and our subconsious is our key to act upon what we have learned?

[Hellcat]

I'm kinda thinking that subconscious and conscious are realated. Let me give you an example. Lets say a child is born, and from that moment of birth it has no learned behaviour, it doesn't learn to cry to get a reaction. It doesn't learn anything, because we haven't given it Free Will, consiousness or sub consiousness. We able Free Will at which point there is no learned behaviour so the natural response of Free Will, is to learn. The baby (lets say its a bit older so it can actually do something)..the child picks up an egg (no reasoning envolved, it just did) why did the child pick it up? The child won't know, it just did it. So we could say it was a subconsious act without reasoning, but it was free will. The child now has learned what an egg feels like. The child drops the egg, the egg breaks. The child has now learned that when you drop an egg it breaks. The next time a child picks up an egg, the child has the power to choose wether or not to break the egg- it becomes conscious decisions. Now we could imply that the consious is awaken the minute a new born baby learns something. Maybe the consious is our key to learning, and our subconsious is our key to act upon what we have learned?

Yeah, that would explain why I run away from moths. Consiously I'm aware that moths aren't threatening, but for some reason my brain has stored away my scray experience with moths and my mums attitude towards these insects. When a moth starts flying, my subconsious is alerted to what it learned in the past, and sends messages to my consious to get the hell out of here

[LGM]

Now we could imply that the consious is awaken the minute a new born baby learns something. Maybe the consious is our key to learning, and our subconsious is our key to act upon what we have learned?

Going back to Freud, he did suggest that whilst we are born with the Id intact, the development of the ego is at 5-6 months of age. It is there that conscious starts to play its cards.

Not to mention, he did suggest the existence of the Preconscious, which may be argued lies somewhere between unconcious and conscious thought. Ahem, I am not sure that has any relevance to the more recent posts of this thread, but oh well...

Speaking about the 'egg' analogy, a devout and extremely obsessive Freudian theorist may say that the child already knows that it shouldn't drop the egg. This may be becuase it's unconcious innate drives, housed in the Id, recognise the egg as a valid food source. An extremely unlikely argument mayhaps, but you never can be sure in the realms of psychology...

[GoddessWolf]

I was looking at my bedroom door, and I have this list with inspirational quotes on it. I found one that instead of putting on the quotes thread, seemed more interesting to post here.

"There is nothing ever good or bad, but thinking makes it so." William Shakespeare

[YoungFang]

Seeing as free will perceived as the ability to make decisions without environmental and extraneous influence. I would say it exists as long as there is no fate or Gods. Seeing as I do not know if that exists I do not know if free will exists. I would like to believe in it as no one likes the idea of being trapped into how they live from what career they have to choosing what to watch on television dictated to them.

[LycanSpectre]

Seeing as free will perceived as the ability to make decisions without environmental and extraneous influence.

By this definition, then no, Free Will does not exist, as there ARE environmental and extraneous influences that do act on us and attempt to influence our descisions. :)

[Sonicassassin]

free will is an illusioni learned this by having constant deja vuyes you still can make decisionslive is like a moviethe end is already on the reeland you cant see it until you have past the restevery moment of you life has already happenedi dont like pop culturebut im quoting the oracle from matrix"you already made the decision you just need to understand why you made it"i slipped on the icei just broke my thumbim on presciption pain killersif i didnt quote exactlyi feel too good to carebecause of the deja vui know everything happens for a reason

[Hellcat]

Going back to Freud, he did suggest that whilst we are born with the Id intact, the development of the ego is at 5-6 months of age. It is there that conscious starts to play its cards.

Not to mention, he did suggest the existence of the Preconscious, which may be argued lies somewhere between unconcious and conscious thought. Ahem, I am not sure that has any relevance to the more recent posts of this thread, but oh well...

Speaking about the 'egg' analogy, a devout and extremely obsessive Freudian theorist may say that the child already knows that it shouldn't drop the egg. This may be becuase it's unconcious innate drives, housed in the Id, recognise the egg as a valid food source. An extremely unlikely argument mayhaps, but you never can be sure in the realms of psychology...

I find it hard to believe that a human baby can identify a valid food source that it hasn't come across before. It only knows (in my belief) food because it learns food- it doesn't know milk is food until mother coaxes the baby onto her breast. Everything a baby picks up goes in its mouth, it's not prejudice- it will quite happily swallow a penny if you let it. How many parents have rushed their toddlers to the docs because they've swallowed a penny. As far as human behaviour goes, I agree that it's an unlikely arguement. However, with some creatures it the concept of preconscious could probably be true- creatures that hatch from an egg and immediatly have to fend for themselves- tadpoles for example, don't have a parent around to teach them what to eat. Perhaps they work on the process of trial and error, but something must drive them to eat in the first place. A new born baby doesn't have the drive to eat, it's mother has to teach it that food kills the hunger pain by applying the baby to her breast, the only instinct (or preconsciousness it has is suck- babies are born with that knowledge, my daughter was sucking her thumb before she was even born! It's only when the baby discovers it can hold things that it starts putting things in its mouth. Valid food source for humans (in my opinion) is learned.

[LycanSpectre]

What if free will is like a skill? Something you learn to exercise. I know people who are so dependant on other people to make decisions for them (IE my last g/f. She was named after a chemical weapon....
That shoulda told me something....). When their source of decisions is lost, they dont know what to do. They mill about for a few weeks, until they aquire a new source of decisions. Some people find this sort of existence to be pleasing, but I find it dismal.

Maybe you dont have free will until you are forced to use it.

[LGM]

RE: Hellcats daughter:: babies are born with that knowledge, my daughter was sucking her thumb before she was even born! It's only when the baby discovers it can hold things that it starts putting things in its mouth.

Freud would have said this was due to the mouth being the first area of childhood fixation. The first of the Ids drives to really kick in is to stimulate oneself orally, whether it be sucking a mothers teet, a thumb, or food.

Anyways, all of Freuds nonsence aside, I believe that Free Will is what you make of it. If you believe that you do things because of X, Y or Z, then that's true. If you believe that nothing controls your actions, then that is true. Essentially, reality does not exist. Rather, humans invent reality.

[Hellcat]

Freud would have said this was due to the mouth being the first area of childhood fixation. The first of the Ids drives to really kick in is to stimulate oneself orally, whether it be sucking a mothers teet, a thumb, or food.

Anyways, all of Freuds nonsence aside, I believe that Free Will is what you make of it. If you believe that you do things because of X, Y or Z, then that's true. If you believe that nothing controls your actions, then that is true. Essentially, reality does not exist. Rather, humans invent reality.

and so...

[LycanSpectre]

Anyways, all of Freuds nonsence aside, I believe that Free Will is what you make of it. If you believe that you do things because of X, Y or Z, then that's true. If you believe that nothing controls your actions, then that is true.

So, what you are saying is that if you want to be controled by outside forces, you wont try to control yourself, you will just go with the flow?

[DarkWolf]

Essentially, reality does not exist. Rather, humans invent reality

So believe with all your heart and mind and soul that you can defy the false reality of gravity and jump off a ladder in hopes to soar the beautiful and wonderous skies....



...and fall to the ground.

[LGM]

Exactly DarkWolf. If you really believe that you can fly, then that is your truth. No amount of people telling you otherwise will help. If you fall and break your legs, maybe you will realise a different truth (what one might term the REAL truth), or maybe you will blame your fall on a simple miscalculation of the wind.

It's exactly the same for followers of any religion. They would die, swearing the existence of X, Y or Z. 99% of them could offer no more evidence of the existence of a deity other than "It's what I believe".

And this is the same for Free Will. A man who swears that destiny holds has no hand on his shoulder, lives in a reality where he is free. A man who believes his destiny is guided, lives in a reality where he has limitations of his freedom. Thus, Free Will is what you make of it.

If anyone has entered this thread searching for any scientific basis, or even logic for that matter, then they are mistaken. This is a subject where such straight thinking has no bearing and there is no right answer.

Apologies for any complications during any of my posts. Conveying points with any degree of clarity is a skill that evades me. In fact, you may as well ingore any previous posts of mine, as this one contains the fundamental point.

[Hellcat]

Exactly DarkWolf. If you really believe that you can fly, then that is your truth. No amount of people telling you otherwise will help. If you fall and break your legs, maybe you will realise a different truth (what one might term the REAL truth), or maybe you will blame your fall on a simple miscalculation of the wind.

It's exactly the same for followers of any religion. They would die, swearing the existence of X, Y or Z. 99% of them could offer no more evidence of the existence of a deity other than "It's what I believe".

And this is the same for Free Will. A man who swears that destiny holds has no hand on his shoulder, lives in a reality where he is free. A man who believes his destiny is guided, lives in a reality where he has limitations of his freedom. Thus, Free Will is what you make of it.

If anyone has entered this thread searching for any scientific basis, or even logic for that matter, then they are mistaken. This is a subject where such straight thinking has no bearing and there is no right answer.

Apologies for any complications during any of my posts. Conveying points with any degree of clarity is a skill that evades me. In fact, you may as well ingore any previous posts of mine, as this one contains the fundamental point.

That's the interesting thing about floserfy, as the saying goes "you can dispute me, but you can't disprove me" so I know I'm right. The annoying thing is, so is everyone else on this thread...either that or we are all wrong, but since there is no provern answer, the seriousness of the situation is- Non of it is really important to our fundamental existence.

[LOBO REY]

First off your time and effect on this rock is predeterimed, secound you do have free will. The concept of free will is weather or not to belive in God or to belive in other gods. That is free will to turn from him or to belive in him. That is where the trem orginated. So what is your choice?

[LycanSpectre]

First off your time and effect on this rock is predeterimed, secound you do have free will. The concept of free will is weather or not to belive in God or to belive in other gods. That is free will to turn from him or to belive in him. That is where the trem orginated. So what is your choice?

Ooohhh.... now we could start a whole new debate on the existence and nature of God/Goddess/Dietie(s). But this isn't the right forum for that. I think. But what fun it would be! :D

So anywho, what you are saying is that everything EXCEPT our choices about what we beleive concerning religion are already made for us?

I dont buy it.

[Gold Fox]

See I belive everything is chosen not by us but society, and this is done by basic principles. 1]Peer pressure 2]Whats expected of us from society and 3]Whats happening around us. I belive it was John Locke who stated that "humans are born innocent but society corrupts them.

[LycanSpectre]

See I belive everything is chosen not by us but society, and this is done by basic principles. 1]Peer pressure 2]Whats expected of us from society and 3]Whats happening around us. I belive it was John Locke who stated that "humans are born innocent but society corrupts them.

Then how do you explain the rebles, the people who go against society? They grew up in the same soicety everyone else did, why aren't they conforming? People can make choices to go against society, peer pressure, expectations, etc. Society can attempt to influence, but the choice is up to the individual.

[Hellcat]

Then how do you explain the rebles, the people who go against society? They grew up in the same soicety everyone else did, why aren't they conforming? People can make choices to go against society, peer pressure, expectations, etc. Society can attempt to influence, but the choice is up to the individual.

Not necessarily. Some people have the strength to do there own thing, they don't need the guidance, of others to tell them how to be, but is it free will that gives them that strength, or upbringing? if its upbringing then they are still being told how to behave, ie their parents have taught them to behave like they are in control. I'm not saying there isn't such thing as free will, I'm just playing devils advocate :droolbloo

[LycanSpectre]

if its upbringing then they are still being told how to behave, ie their parents have taught them to behave like they are in control.

Didn't think of that one. :D

[Hellcat]

Not necessarily. Some people have the strength to do there own thing, they don't need the guidance, of others to tell them how to be, but is it free will that gives them that strength, or upbringing? if its upbringing then they are still being told how to behave, ie their parents have taught them to behave like they are in control. I'm not saying there isn't such thing as free will, I'm just playing devils advocate :droolbloo

I'd better back that lot ^. I was brought up by my mother. I was scared of people, simply because she was scared of people- She wouldn't dare take anything back to a shop that didn't fit, because she was scared of people in the know. Silly stuff like that, answering the phone to stangers etc. I was in my early teens when she made friends with a lady. Now this lady was one hell of a manipulative bitch, she played my mum around her little finger, but it wasn't that I liked about her. I liked the fact that she stood no shit from nobody. She wouldn't back down from verbal battle, and she wouldn't think twice about taking something back to the shop because it didn't fit and request a refund- she'd argue it out with the little guys in the shop, then demand to see the manager. She always got her own way cos she faught for it. In that respect I admired her for her strength (though admittedly I didn't like how she used it sometimes). One day I thought- shit, why can't I be like her? Then I thought, maybe I can and before long i realised that humans were just as human as me, and I could stand up to them without being eaten. So now I'm a stronger person. The point is, my strength was influenced by somebody else, but the discission was mine to try and be like this woman- I made that choice because I wasn't happy with the person I was. Was it my free will, or purely my discontentment with myself that drove me to my dicission?

[Nightmare GenoReaper]

This is a question my Philosophy class is examining. Do we have free will? Are we responsible for our decisions? Are we in control, or do outside influences rule our existence? Is every decision we make merely a result of warring desires? Is the subcounscious using the idea of free will as a tool to justify its decisions to our conscious selves?

What is your take on all this?

I think that, yes, we do have free will. You dont always do the things you want, do you? We have the ability to choose what we do, but outside influences will try to bend and shape our choices. While we are ultimatly responsible for our decisons and actions, there are outside forces which influence us.

I know but this is the first post back here

Free Will? no the government takes that away from you as soon as you get your birth certificate X_X

Your right we are responible for our actions, we create our own destiny, blah blah blah however we CAN do aything we want, it's just that damn government again that spanks us right in the arse if we do all of the certain "wrong" things.

Are We In Control? Not entirly, but weare in control of our lives, what we do today reflects upon the past

Subconsious is your true nature, meaning you can do anything you want. Heck (for the sake of example)i can go dance naked at Foodtown and then feast on various fruits while banging my girl friend, that's one of the truths of my subconsious, so ina way your truthful rankself comprismises with your well thoughout descions making self. The End

[Hellcat]

I know but this is the first post back here

Free Will? no the government takes that away from you as soon as you get your birth certificate X_X

Your right we are responible for our actions, we create our own destiny, blah blah blah however we CAN do aything we want, it's just that damn government again that spanks us right in the arse if we do all of the certain "wrong" things.

Are We In Control? Not entirly, but weare in control of our lives, what we do today reflects upon the past

Subconsious is your true nature, meaning you can do anything you want. Heck (for the sake of example)i can go dance naked at Foodtown and then feast on various fruits while banging my girl friend, that's one of the truths of my subconsious, so ina way your truthful rankself comprismises with your well thoughout descions making self. The End


Now here's someone who can make the Super ego theory sound convincing :D

[Nightmare GenoReaper]

Now here's someone who can make the Super ego theory sound convincing :D

:beerchug:

that's all i have to say