An Alternative Approach To Free Will

[EvieTheAvocado]

@JesseB Well you are an existentialist ... so that is definitely different to the standard interpretations.

... although ultimately it may fall into one of the other categories ... just for different reasons.

I sometimes think that Sartre's view that we are "condemned to be free" is just the other side of the same coin to my view that we're all "lucky to be unfree if only we could realize it".

[JesseB]

@JesseB Well you are an existentialist ... so that is definitely different to the standard interpretations.

... although ultimately it may form into one of the other categories ... just for different reasons.

I sometimes think that Sartre's view that we are "condemned to be free" is just the other side of the same coin to my view that we're all "lucky to be unfree if only we could realize it".

Agreed. And how cruel it is that we should know life, yet are destined to forget it. I highly doubt I could ever be understood. I share my thoughts and ideas, yet they seem rather unique to me. oh well. Just don't ever go thinking I'm some noble or good person. 


One of my favorite lines comes from a song "the real folk blues" ending theme song to Cowboy Bebop.
"Living in muddy water isn't such a bad life, as long as it ends after the first time."

[JesseB]

Damnit @EvieTheAvocado , now I'm loosing track of my anime cause I'm lost in thought. Thanks :p

[EvieTheAvocado]

Always happy to make someone think.

[possibletarian]

I don't believe in free will, at least free will as commonly understood.

I think not believing in free will has helped me considerably, I look at others with much more compassion than when I saw things in terms of a rigid right and wrong, and correct or incorrect behaviour. It's very clear to me how the human mind can be manipulated, re trained etc, in fact the more I look at it, the more free will becomes just a fantasy that people (are maybe) better at believing.

Regardless i certainly feel as if I'm making the choices, indeed in a way I am, they are not coming from outside, that making a conscious choice (which I think is what most people would call free will) may be an illusion amuses me rather than disappoints me.

I'm oddly at peace with the whole thing, and on balance after struggling with this question as I moved from theist (most to whom free will is vital) to not believing, I feel more alive more free to forgive and be compassionate, and the thing I enjoy most about it is that I don't judge people anywhere nearly as harshly, and see the world in a more realistic way.
I fell more... complete

[EvieTheAvocado]

w00t. I'm not the only one who thinks that life is actually better without that belief!

@possibletarian feel free to vote for poll option 2, if you like, then, and if you deem it an appropriate option (I decided that I was still able to vote from a hypothetical perspective ... that if I believed in free will in the strong sense, or if free will existed in the strong sense, then I'd be worse off). I'm alone on that option at the moment!

[Cheerful Charlie]

http://evangelicalarminians.org/wp-conte..._large.jpg

[Smercury44]

I have now given my own answer in the poll as I now realize that I am still able to answer, despite not believing in free will, by answering in a hypothetical manner. I already don't believe that free will exists ... but I already think that if everyone knew of this fact and properly understood the implications then the correct answer would be option 2.

Option 2 assumes that most people will explore this type of self reflection about free will. In this scenario they must realize they have no free will in order to take the actions the proposition suggests.

I voted for 3. If free will does not exist in the world as it is now, then nothing changes in my opinion. It would have to have been this way since life first formed, and nothing’s changed yet. The answer is in 3 “Free will is an interesting philosophical problem to those who like that sort of thing”. Since a lot of people don’t take the time to consider this, no change. It’s meaningless, we keep going in as we have been. Although I will admit I think our evolution trends toward the things suggested in #2, I don’t beleive it’s tied to our awareness of free will.

I see though that your poll is for those who beleive in free will, and I’m not necessarily in that camp. I don’t have a difinitive position.

[EvieTheAvocado]

@Smercury44

Yeah, the difference is definitely meaningless to a lot of people. Perhaps half of the majority ... the other half of the majority think free will is really important but that's just because they think that if we stop believing in free will that we'll all start acting really irresponsibly or out of control ... or that we'll succumb to total fatalism or defeatism.

But you're right ... that would make no sense because obviously if free will doesn't exist then we've never had it ... so why would we start acting less free? The point would be whether we are as free as we think we are ... and if we're not then whether realizing we're not can help us in some way due to us no longer believing that we have even more freedom than we have.

One of the most unique and bizarre positions on the topic of free will ... is called Illusionism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusionism_(philosophy)

These people believe that free will doesn't exist but a belief in free will is a necessary false belief and we're better off believing in it even though it's a false belief. They believe that it's too late for them because they've already discovered the truth ... but that their mission is to help others by making sure that no one ever convinces them of the truth: that free will doesn't exist.

Very unique and bizarre ... but I think quite silly. It also has a bit of a conspiracy theory feel to it, to me. Not a fan. Here's a fundamental criticism of it from the article above:

Smilansky's thesis is considered a radical one, and other philosophers disagree with it. Professor Derk Pereboom of Cornell University, for example, disagrees that hard incompatibilism necessarily does away with self-worth, because to a large extent that sense of self-worth isn't related to will at all, let alone to free will. Aspects of worthiness such as natural beauty, native physical ability, and intelligence are not voluntary. James Lenman takes a similar line, arguing that Smilansky's expression of the problems is overstated. The problems that he presents are less fundamentally metaphysical than simply practical in nature.

My bold.