Free will, freedom from what?

[Immanuel Can]

None of that suggests that the law of gravity didn't work;

Well done! You figured out that the law of gravity is unchangeable, and that there is no freedom from the regularity of nature.

You needn't pre-fashion false conclusions for me. I'm happy to make true and justified ones, instead.

Whether or not a person will jump from a height is not determined by gravity. It's decided by volition. Volition is free: the person may decide to jump, or may decline to do so. Only AFTER he jumps does gravity have any say at all; and after that, its amount of "say" will be impacted by other factors, such as the height of the fall, the availability of soft landing places (trees, bushes, ponds, etc.), the angle of impact, the density of bones and physiological durability of the faller...and so on.

So there is certainly plenty of "freedom from the regularity of nature" in your story, there. There's no absolute certainty how the story will play out.

[Janoah]

Only AFTER he jumps does gravity have any say at all;

I shouldn't have praised you Why talk such nonsense. Gravity constantly and tirelessly has something to say, even old ladies on a bench understand this, otherwise old ladies would fly in zero gravity, like Yuri Gagarin.

[Immanuel Can]

Only AFTER he jumps does gravity have any say at all;

I shouldn't have praised you Why talk such nonsense.

Who makes you jump off buildings?

See, the insults don't amount to anything, most especially when your responses make no sense. Nobody thinks that gravity makes people jump.

[Janoah]

See, the insults don't amount to anything, most especially when your responses make no sense.

I apologize, because I really don't know who makes You talk nonsense, apparently not gravity. But if it weren't for gravity, no one would hear Your nonsense, because the atmosphere without gravity would leave the sinful Earth, and without air, even a fish only opens its mouth, but there are no acoustic waves

[henry quirk]

The question...

Who (or what) makes you jump off buildings?

...stands.

Can you, will you, answer?

[Immanuel Can]

...the atmosphere without gravity would leave the sinful Earth,...

Now you're really getting weird. Nobody here even came close to saying gravity wasn't real. The point was that it's not the only force in the universe, and there's no reason why the existence of natural laws tells us freedom is not real. It's just not logical.

What you've created is what's called a "non sequitur."

[Flannel Jesus]

...so what is freedom from?

This is a good question, an important question, but you missed a bit in your question. Freedom comes in 2 forms, freedom from, and freedom to. I think that if you want to ask this question in a way that casts as wide a net as possible, you would add that to it - freedom from what or freedom to what?

PS simultaneity being relative doesn't rule out determinism. Hell, Einstein himself was a determinist.

[promethean75]

https://youtu.be/IQ4nwTTmcgs

And then here is an example of another obfuscator uncomfortable with the fact that there is no freewill. They're a dime a dozen.

Lol. As if deciding to get married is a generically different kind of brain event than arbitrarily deciding to move your hand. What a dummy.

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx1ryfWR8xI5 ... pg6zhRfdOy

[Janoah]

Nobody here even came close to saying gravity wasn't real.

Congratulations! You have realized that you obey the law of gravity. Now it's just a small matter, realize that you have no freedom to disobey the law of nature.

[Immanuel Can]

Nobody here even came close to saying gravity wasn't real.

Congratulations! You have realized that you obey the law of gravity. Now it's just a small matter, realize that you have no freedom to disobey the law of nature.

So you're not able to understand the problem with your theory? You think that the existence of a set of natural laws somehow proved human beings don't have volition?

It doesn't, of course. But let me ask you this, instead: if we, to whom you are arguing, have no free will, no volition, then how do you expect us to change our minds? According to your theory, the only reason we think what we think, at any given time, is because "natural law" made us think what we think. So we have no ability to choose our beliefs, and the quality of your arguments has no impact on whether we believe X or Y. Only "natural laws" determine that, not quality of argument.

So how come you're trying to argue?

Answer: that you really don't believe what you say you believe. Or else, you do believe it, but don't understand it's nonsense.

[Janoah]

Freedom comes in 2 forms, freedom from, and freedom to.

So, start answering the question freedom from what?


***simultaneity being relative doesn't rule out determinism.***

The relativity of simultaneity rules out simultaneous infinity.

[Flannel Jesus]

***simultaneity being relative doesn't rule out determinism.***

The relativity of simultaneity rules out simultaneous infinity.

I don't know what that means, but whatever it means, it's still the case that relativity doesn't rule out determinism

[Janoah]

So you're not able to understand the problem with your theory?

No theory, I asked you a simple question, do you acknowledge the fact that you have no freedom from the law of gravity?

Oh, maybe you can walk on water?!

[Immanuel Can]

So you're not able to understand the problem with your theory?

No theory, I asked you a simple question, do you acknowledge the fact that you have no freedom from the law of gravity?

Oh, maybe you can walk on water?!

I can't. But I'm not God.

But could the God of Moses, who created the "laws" of disease, of weather, and of hydrodynamics, suspend/interrupt those laws for His purposes? You'd better hope He could: because if He couldn't, Israel isn't special in any way at all, and has no intrinsic rights, and has absolutely no claim at all on its land.

So which is it?

[Immanuel Can]

***simultaneity being relative doesn't rule out determinism.***

The relativity of simultaneity rules out simultaneous infinity.

I don't know what that means, but whatever it means, it's still the case that relativity doesn't rule out determinism

FJ is right: all it does is change the "mechanism" that is supposed to produce the predetermined outcome. It doesn't make the outcome less predetermined. Instead of it being by predictable natural forces, it merely becomes by unpredictable forces or randomness. But it doesn't open up an explanation for human volition or freedom.