Thank you for the concession.
You're still not getting it. The theory of free will is born from the illusion of the perception of free will. We feel like we actively chose to do something because it feels like our choice and our thoughts are operating simultaneously. This is not true. Research research shows a person’s choices can be seen by an observer before the person is aware of their own choice. Just like the finger/nose experiment, what we perceive isn't always an accurate reflection of reality. A greater database of knowledge doesn't change this.
So! You are saying that the observer (let say under scientific conditions) would know that the person being observered, were about to kill them.
Even if the messages we send happen seconds before we actually do them, who is to say that the message sent seconds ago were not inspired by our will. It may appear to be possible to record every chemical/organic event going on in our minds, and as such it should be possible to predict everything someone is going to do, shouldn't it?
I am sure however that would not prove true would it, they would find there were happenings they couldn't account for, and it is those happenings that are guided by our will.
Perhaps these arguments are too incongruent with what you believe to be true, or what you genuinely and deeply desire to be true.
No! I wouldn't say they were incompatible, with what I know nor is what I know a desire. I am a sapient being I make choices, I'm not merely an automaton, that reacts only to stimuli, I have a myriad of choices, to any action. Yes my actions can be determined by my environment by a miniscule amount. But I make the choice from a humongous selection. Else we would all be making the same choices wouldn't we, yet we don't.
Perhaps you cannot make this connection because the cognitive dissonance is too strong, and your brain will prevent this new information by virtue of of previous conditioning.
Your a bit of an arrogant s**t aren't you. There is no cognitive dissonance here, I am not conflicted in my opinions it is because I have a myriad of options open to me that I could never be conflicted in this matter.
Perhaps a desire to understand new information and facts will supersede a desire to maintain a current belief and this these arguments will eventually make sense. Which one will happen, I don't think either of us can predict, but ultimately, your brain is operating in the same way your stomach is - it does what it evolved to do, and you're only aware of some of it.
As I said in post# 32 "I agree we live in a derministic universe. And as such our life’s are ruled by it. But I'm sorry it has only some effect on the choices we make." If I have no will to chose then according to you, I am the way I am and hold the views I express, because it is part of my genetic makeup, You are the way you are for the same reasons, you used the word choice. Where is the choice? The fact that our opinion differ means we are not all running on simply our genetic make up, to say we have no will whatsoever is ludicrous to me. It would mean I didn't chose my wife, I didn't chose by home. It would renders it all meaningless. How infantile!
A person could kill with impunity as it would not be their fault, there would be no point in rehabilitating them either, as they are not incontrol of their lives so could happily do it all again and it still would not be their fault. That is nonsensical.
This is why the free will argument is so interesting. If I may, Bert, I was exactly in your position reading these debates a couple years ago. I can pick vanilla or chocolate - I have every bit of free will available to me at any time. I love your use of the word "rubbish" and I know how you feel.
Interesting indeed. Yet another question crops up then, what is it that separates us from animals? we would need to look at the basics.
I like Vanilla Ice Cream - but I did not start liking it because I wanted to. I don't even know when I started liking it. But I enjoy eating it. However, whenever/wherever Vanilla Ice Cream is offered to me I may not always accept it.
I have that "choice" which most animals lack.
Give a dog a bone and it'll snap it out of your hand, except of course a specially trained one.
So we all know that the true power of our will, is when we know we can, but we chose not to. Doesn't that amount to free will.
But. With you telling Albeto you have no free will in changing your opinion, I don't think it is as cut and dried as that.
I did not telling him that, it is what he was suggesting.
The fact that you argue in and study these debates means your life experiences extends to your ability to intellectually search for truth and change your position. You have no choice. Everything in your genetic makeup, experiences, mental capacities, brings you to be the person you are, and determines the choices you will make.
This is were we differ. My knowledge and my life lead me to make a choice, from a myriad of differing choices. they all may have a link to my genetic makeup, experiences, mental capacities, But I make the choice, I think therefore I am. I'm not an automaton, I'm not simply an animal, I am sapient.
Anyone who thinks people in prison in the US have a good life are kidding themselves.
No one said that, What I said was they get a better life than there victims ever could. So they should at least get hard labour. They do have it easy in comparison.
I think you are all making the mistake of believing that your total life is already determined, but you have the ability to change any outcome and because of that you have a will all your own. You sound like a butch of modern day solipsist, One brain, one ego, one self. How asinine. If you still have choices no matter how small or how little, you still have will.