Freeing of the Will

[Wizard22]

You inverted my contention. That they do Not understand causality makes them "free".

Neither do most humans understand such.

Animals and Humans can both act freely in some ways, demonstrating some aspects of free-will by Choice.

Understanding of Causality, hypothetically, enhances a human's abilities and choice-deciding.

[Wizard22]

Selective Free-Will

To what depth do our Biases go,
Down to the roots of the mind & soul?


It is clearer to me now that Westerners/Americans no longer believe in Free-Will, as-if they ever did in the first place.  What was once "Classical Liberal Values" as Western Mores and Ethics, is no more.  The ideal was that, if you emigrated to the United States, that you'd be assured 'Equal Human Rights' under the precipice of American Constitutionalism and Republicanism.  But do you have such 'Rights'—when you don't believe in them?  Or worse—when nobody else believes in them?!

The American system of 'Rights' made sense during the early and middle phases of Spanish and Anglo Colonialism of the New World.  After winning Independence through war from the Old World, the New World colonies and governments could establish rules, laws, and ethos of their own making.  This led to the romantic idealism of Constitutional Republicanism.  It encouraged immigrating settlers, explorers, traders, entrepreneurs, conquerors, etc. to 'do as they will' in the New World with very little, or no, oversight from the central government.

It worked for a long while...until it didn't.  Until it outlived its usefulness.  Now the time has come in the West, where the newer generations of 'youths' no longer desire Individual or Independent values, and wish to replace these with Socialist-Communist-Marxist-Fascist traditions.  As such, the need and desire for individual "Free-Will" has all but evaporated.  Rather than exalt and herald the 'Western Man', American Cowboy, Spanish Conquistador, that time has become subverted and draws to an end.  The Western Man is...no longer needed ...by the Globalist Establishments ...to decimate and control frontier lands.  The Frontier, the West, and the Free Man, are all gone with it.

Because frontier-societies and wilderness have all been taken and settled, the American ideology for Independence and Individualism has been switched and traded...for Globalist Marxism.  Now ideologies of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, George Soros, loom over and above the US Presidency.  The Global Elites subvert Western nations in order to conduct elitist, international business, far above and beyond the scope of "the little man" of the West.

The Free men don't stand much of a chance.

Because the Conservative-Right is not United, unlike the Liberal-Left (in the United States).  The American Individual has very little power, compared to massive organizations, corporations, and globalists, who use and utilize billions and trillions of dollars in leverage, against them.


I'll cut this short for now.

Free-Will is being dismantled, deconstructed, by those who 'brought' it into effect in the first place.  The Free-Man has a time and a place.  But in a Globalist world, under one mighty Fascist Tyranny, there is no room for Free-Men.  Thus we all see these attacks against Free-Will, undermining it, doubting it, picking at it from the edges, cutting it smaller and smaller, chipping at the metal of a coin to devalue it...until it is worthless.  Until all the precious metals are gone from it.

There is Hope.  But that will be for another time.

[Wizard22]

A main problem here with Free-Will is its 'selectivity' according to Confirmation Bias.

The Compatibilists believe in free-will...as long as it directly or indirectly benefits them. But when it doesn't, then it's "Determined".

So when "it's good for me and my group/society", then it's free-will.

But when "it's not good for me and my group/society", then it's determined.


The Hard Determinists are more rational. They understand and know that you can't "pick and choose selectively" when Cause & Affect apply to you or not. Thus the Hard Determinists conclude that Choice is not possible in the first place—or it is completely delusional. Choice is an Illusion, to the HDs. It is a "trick of the mind". And to the HDs, your notion of Choice is you deluding yourself, attempting to "feel in control" of your Destiny, when you're not.

So we can see that from the perspective of HDs, and LFWs, that Compatibilists are wrong and flawed, with selective bias. That free-will is a label for what suits the emotions of the masses.

Again, Free-Will when it suits my sentimentality, but Determinism when it does not.


How convenient of the Compatibilists...

[Harbal]

It is known that decisions we think we make consciously are already made on a subconscious level, and our conscious is merely informed afterwards. I know there have been experiments that show this, but I'm not going to look for references to any, because I don't care who accepts it or doesn't.

As for the question of whether every single event that ever occurrs -from earthquakes down to the actions of particles within atoms- is subject solely to the laws governing cause and effect, with no possibility of true randomness coming into the equation; I don't believe it can be answered with certainty. At least, not yet.

I think it safe to say that our will is certainly not as free as we feel it to be, but I don't see how we can say much more than that with any confidence.

[Dontaskme]

It is known that decisions we think we make consciously are already made on a subconscious level, and our conscious is merely informed afterwards. I know there have been experiments that show this, but I'm not going to look for references to any, because I don't care who accepts it or doesn't.

As for the question of whether every single event that ever occurrs -from earthquakes down to the actions of particles within atoms- is subject solely to the laws governing cause and effect, with no possibility of true randomness coming into the equation; I don't believe it can be answered with certainty. At least, not yet.

I think it safe to say that our will is certainly not as free as we feel it to be, but I don't see how we can say much more than that with any confidence.

Life is simply being lived one without a second...meaning, everything that seems to be alive and living,lives not ''it's'' life, but is being lived by life ONLY, there is no ''it'' IN LIFE...no more than there is an 'it' in 'it's' raining, there's simply 'Raining'.

[Wizard22]

It is known that decisions we think we make consciously are already made on a subconscious level, and our conscious is merely informed afterwards. I know there have been experiments that show this, but I'm not going to look for references to any, because I don't care who accepts it or doesn't.

As for the question of whether every single event that ever occurrs -from earthquakes down to the actions of particles within atoms- is subject solely to the laws governing cause and effect, with no possibility of true randomness coming into the equation; I don't believe it can be answered with certainty. At least, not yet.

I think it safe to say that our will is certainly not as free as we feel it to be, but I don't see how we can say much more than that with any confidence.

Some 'decisions' are and some are not.

Some decisions are made "in the moment".

Some decisions are on-going.


The Determinist arguments against human Choice are not convincing. If you've been convinced by them, then perhaps re-think why and how.

[Harbal]

The Determinist arguments against human Choice are not convincing. If you've been convinced by them, then perhaps re-think why and how.

I know that our conscious self is in far less control of our decisions and actions than we are aware of, and to say much beyond that is just speculation. It seems many people want various degrees of free will or determinism to be the case, and, consequently, bind themselves to a position that cannot be justified by the knowledge currently available, and that most of the participants in this "debate" are driven by emotion and sentiment, rather than a desire to know the truth.

[Wizard22]

a position that cannot be justified by the knowledge currently available,

According to whom?

To your choice of Scientists and Experts, right? And furthermore, you admitted "not to a certainty". So if you're not certain, then where is the "wiggle-room"?

Is it not as I said...that 'decisions' can be big or small? That a choice of which breakfast cereal to eat, is not the same as which job and profession to pursue?

and that most of the participants in this "debate" are driven by emotion and sentiment, rather than a desire to know the truth.

This is a non-sequitur.

I'll admit that there is a lot of 'backward' justification as to most of human actions. Subconscious and Unconscious 'decisions' are made, by most people, which is what people call 'custom' and 'habit', daily life, habituation. That doesn't mean that there's no Decisions/Choices which are made in-the-moment. Or that some decisions in life, are of Critical importance. Because they are. Consider this, why is conscious awareness of choice even necessary?

(Hint: it isn't)

[henry quirk]

USA has a major mass immigration problem of the 2nd and 3rd world flooding into the Southern US border.

Yes.

These people want to be 'free', to become free, by what America has to offer and represents.

Well, some do.

America, hypothetically, should be the nation of 'free-will'.

What America is a nation of free people. It's unfortunate the nation has been overshadowed by The United States.

will Tyranny and Totalitarianism rule over every square inch of this planet?

That's the goal, yeah.

[Harbal]

a position that cannot be justified by the knowledge currently available,

According to whom?

According to me. It's a moderately informed opinion.

To your choice of Scientists and Experts, right? And furthermore, you admitted "not to a certainty". So if you're not certain, then where is the "wiggle-room"?

I have no reason to think these people are not reputable. I do admit to no certainty, and my criticism is of those who do not.

and that most of the participants in this "debate" are driven by emotion and sentiment, rather than a desire to know the truth.

This is a non-sequitur.

I think what I said is true and relevant.

[Wizard22]

It's not relevant, because choices are not necessarily momentary.

A "choice" can endure over a lifetime, and beyond a lifetime.

The attempt to confine choices to human expectations, is the larger problem that you don't seem aware of.

[Dontaskme]

The Determinist arguments against human Choice are not convincing. If you've been convinced by them, then perhaps re-think why and how.

There are only reactions known, never an action. Reactions are always of past tense, and never this immediate moment.

Some decisions are made "in the moment".

If that was true, then choice making would certainly be deterministic. To know an action has happened would require a knowledge on demand that has already been freeze framed into the archive of past memory, and is never this immediate present.

[Wizard22]

Organisms rely on their memories, genetic and memetic, to make decisions in the present and future.

Decisions made in the present cannot be 'reactions' because there is nothing to react to.

This is why choice and decision, made present, is called Action, not reaction.

[Dontaskme]

Organisms rely on their memories, genetic and memetic, to make decisions in the present and future.

If that is true then all decisions are predictive, predicated from memory, it's an illusory reactory action, which still does not imply that a decision is being made in the realtime immediacy of now. Predication is a demand for knowledge from memory, which apparently gives the illusory sense of an autonomous continuity of there being a decision made in the here and now. But even now is an illusion simply because life is in constant flux, it is always changing, and so nothing in reality is ever the same twice, and nature, this ever present eternal now never repeats exactly. That's why memory only serves to freeze frame every known happening for future reference now, in other words, the future is only a representation or copy of the past appearing in the here and now. Life is an absolute presentation, it is never a representation, which is the illusory nature of knowledge.

Decisions made in the present cannot be 'reactions' because there is nothing to react to.

There is nothing, not a thing making a decision. Only when there is a requirement for knowledge on demand, does it appear there is a 'something' making a decision, but that 'something or someone' is only held as a concept known in memory.

This is why choice and decision, made present, is called Action, not reaction.

[Wizard22]

If that is true then all decisions are predictive, predicated from memory, it's an illusory reactory action, which still does not imply that a decision is being made in the realtime immediacy of now. Predication is a demand for knowledge from memory, which apparently gives the illusory sense of an autonomous continuity of there being a decision made in the here and now. But even now is an illusion simply because life is in constant flux, it is always changing, and so nothing in reality is ever the same twice, and nature, this ever present eternal now never repeats exactly. That's why memory only serves to freeze frame every known happening for future reference now, in other words, the future is only a representation or copy of the past appearing in the here and now. Life is an absolute presentation, it is never a representation, which is the illusory nature of knowledge.

That's not quite right.

The memories are likely more illusive than the Action of predication. Because organisms don't know the future. We have to guess. We have to take risks. Taking risks with respect to the future, the unknown, is not "Reactionary". It can't be, unless you're a Fatalist and believe the Future is Predetermined. Then there is also no "Reaction" because everything is already Finished. So that's an illogical, absurdity.

Because an organism's recollection and memorization of the Past is faulty. Organisms and brains have very selective-memory. The 'selecting' part of memory, is genetically correlated. Therefore, every organisms, every individual, every single specie, has distinct 'biases'. But humans know about this and learn more about it through self-consciousness and self-awareness, over time. We learn about the 'blind spots', like in vision.

There is nothing, not a thing making a decision. Only when there is a requirement for knowledge on demand, does it appear there is a 'something' making a decision, but that 'something or someone' is only held as a concept known in memory.

Correct