Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PatrickHenry; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; Pietro; unspun; HalfFull; js1138; Doctor Stochastic
NOTE: The following is from a discussion PatrickHenry and I are having on another thread. I am posting this here, because it pertains to the nature of man, especially the volitional nature of man.

Anyway, the purpose of this is to say that volition (or free will) isn't, to my thinking, a miracle.

On this we agree. There is no reason or necessity to appeal to QM, however, for this belief (nor does it solve anything anyway).

I never use the expression, "free will," because it comes from theology and is loaded with concepts that are incompatible with the meaning of volition. (The wrong meaning of "free will" comes mostly from Augustinianism and Calvinism.)

By volition, I mean that aspect of human consciousness that requires human beings to live and act by conscious choice. There is no question of whether human beings can choose. Human beings must choose. A human being cannot think, or act.

Here's something from The Autonomist, "Philosophy - What Is It?", that explains what I mean:

The Nature of Choice

It is the rational-volitional nature of man that requires everything we do as human beings to be done by conscious choice. Even to do nothing requires a choice.

Before we go any further, let's get something out of the way. As soon as you mention choice, someone will bring up the question of, "free will." Don't ever get caught in that trap. The meaning of that expression is hopelessly muddled and has nothing to do with this matter of choice.

"Do you really believe people have free will?" you will be asked. "You can't do just anything you want," it will be argued. "People's behavior is determined by many things, their heredity, their subconscious, their environment, their education, their economic status....blah, blah, blah."

All of that has nothing to do with the fact that to do anything, you must choose to do it. You do not have to study psychology and philosophy for a million years to know this is true. You can test it for yourself, once and for all, and never have to worry about this question again.

Sit down in a chair somewhere. (You'll have to choose to do it.) Now make one more choice. Choose not to choose anything else. Just sit there and let your heredity, or your subconscious, or environmental influences, or your education, or your money determine your actions.

What happens when you do that? Nothing!

If you never choose anything again, you will never do anything again; but notice, even to not choose you must choose.

The ability to choose, which we call volition, is not about what can be chosen, or how one chooses, or why one chooses, but the fact that a human being not only can choose, but must choose, and that this necessity of choice cannot be avoided or bypassed so long as one is fully conscious.

I would post something about the true nature of cause, but to do it justice would require something very long. As a short answer, the best I can do is to say, cause is not events causing events. The nature of cause is based on the principle that a thing is what it is, A is A, which means all existents have a specific nature that determines what they do. Since all events are only entities doing something, and what an entity will do is determined by its specific nature, the true nature of cause is in the nature of entities, not events. Cause is the expression of the fact that no entity can violate its own nature.

Hank

417 posted on 10/08/2003 8:33:26 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies ]


To: Hank Kerchief
I personally find the word "choice" distorts the nature of reality. Choice connotes picking options from a list. I call this the video game fallacy. In video games you have the impression of free movement, butin fct you are limited a every point by the list of inputs the game responds to.

I don't think this reflects reality. There are in reality, opportunities for truely novel actions, truely new inventions, truely new things under the sun.
418 posted on 10/08/2003 8:57:17 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies ]

To: Hank Kerchief; PatrickHenry; betty boop; Pietro; Phaedrus
I do hate to repeat a post, but I just responded to you on a related subject on another thread and thus would like to mention again here what I said there. You said:

The usual explicit (or implicit) method of escaping the problem is either to deny that everything is causal, to assume something else is injected into the stream of causation (like the will of God), or that ignorance somehow provides an escape from it, (if you don't know what is going to happen it is not caused). This last seems absurd, but is essentially the one used by all those who suppose quantum uncertainty provides an escape from determinism. Ask Alamo-Girl or betty boop.

I responded:

Although superposition is one interesting manifestation of it, the actual object of my musings is dimensionality. Within a four dimension block, we cannot see what will happen in the future, etc. We see the movie one frame at a time.

From a higher dimension view the entire movie is seen at once - the entire 4D block. And within the dynamics of such a higher dimension, all of the events within the 4D are malleable. That is where I see free will being manifest to change the script, so to speak. But it is the dynamics of the higher dimension, the will of God, which allows the free will to actualize in 4D - i.e. change the course of events from our 4D view.

And following betty boop's proposal that one or more of the higher dimensions is an extra time dimension - what appears as a timeline to us in the 4D is actually a plane (or brane) and thus also malleable in the same fashion, e.g. superposition, non-locality, etc.

The last point is relevant to your post because where time in 4D is actually a plane (or brane) and not a line, there is not an inviolable cause/effect relationship. Past, present and future are all accessible. The loss of a firm cause/effect relationship is the main objection to the extra time dimension theory.

OTOH, time as a brane also explains many other phenomenon such non-locality, superposition, dark energy, acceleration of the universe, near death experiences, extra sensory perception, precognition, retro-cognition and so on.

425 posted on 10/08/2003 12:22:00 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson