[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

The left can't accept the idea of free will, because they think that we are nothing but matter and that mind is an illusion. Leftists believe in materialism = that there is nothing more than matter.
Also, accepting the idea of free will would mean that people can be responsible for their actions. Leftism says that no one is responsible for his/her actions.

[ChessExpert]

Thanks in advance for posting your thoughts.

The left can't accept the idea of free will, because they think that we are nothing but matter and that mind is an illusion. Leftists believe in materialism = that there is nothing more than matter.

Also, accepting the idea of free will would mean that people can be responsible for their actions. Leftism says that no one is responsible for his/her actions.

Basically, I think you are right. Just a little hair splitting in this paragraph. There are complications, because neither left nor right are monolithic. There is the religious left, and the agnostic/atheist right. But they are a small percentage of the population. The atheist left and religious right are highly populated. Generally speaking, the first places it’s faith in Government, the second places its faith God. Your statements apply to the agnostic/atheist left, in my opinion.

The ironic thing is that the atheist left denies free will but is very willful! Perhaps post 41 provides an explanation. Conservatives accept constraints. They are part of the great design. This includes both physical and moral constraints. The left is unmoored. If everything is a “construct” of the individual human mind, all is possible. If everything is material in origin, there is no reason to condemn anyone for their actions. Yet many will condemn President Bush. No, they are not consistent. Consistency is just another (moral?) constraint that they ignore when in suits their emotions, or their “passions” (18th century usage).

[Mack the knife]

The debate on "free will" vs. "predestination" predates Christianity by several hundred years. I believe it was the Greek philosopher Demosthenese who first popularized the concept that men's lives were "predestined".

And of course, there is a story that Demosthenese found his slave stealing from him, so he proceeded to beat him.

The slave cried out, and said, "Master! Master! Why do you whip me? Don't you teach that men's lives are predestined? Perhaps I was predestined to steal from you."

Demosthenese thought for a moment, and responded, "Yes, you were predestined to steal from me, and I was predestined to whip you." And he continued to whip him.

This is the heart of the arguement against predestination. One cannot advocate the "truth" of such a proposition - to be consistent, one can only say, "My genes and environment compel me to make this arguement". One cannot claim that it is "truth", because any concept of truth requires the ability to make a decision which is not predestined.