compatibilism

[Age]

Is there a reason why you'd choose without a reason?

I don't think there has to be - maybe I'm even doing it right now without knowing.

So people just make choices randomly. And you call that free. That doesn't seem free to me.

To the contrary, if all my choices were random, I'd feel trapped in a hell-like prison I can't escape!

I prefer the freedom to make choices for reasons. Not to be a slave to randomness. That's what seems like freedom to me.

Every one has 'the ability to make choices', which is just what 'free will' is, and what the words 'free will' refer to.

Now, the reason why every choice that is made, was made, is just because of 'past experiences', solely, and only.

[Age]

I don't think there has to be - maybe I'm even doing it right now without knowing.

So people just make choices randomly. And you call that free. That doesn't seem free to me.

It can be random and it can be not random. So overall it's not random.

Again, more proof of 'this one' not, really, 'knowing' what it is 'talking about'.

[Age]

So people just make choices randomly. And you call that free. That doesn't seem free to me.

It can be random and it can be not random. So overall it's not random.

I don't see why overall it's not random. If it's sometimes random, why is it overall not random?
And why are we rolling our eyes now?

The 'rolling of eyes' is an, unconscious, expression of ' why does the other not know what i am 'talking about' ', when 'the one', "itself", does not even know what it is 'talking about', and thus clearly why it cannot express what it believes it knows, but who has already proven that it does not.

This phenomena can be 'clearly seen' throughout this forum.

[Flannel Jesus]

But, if I had done that earlier, then I would have missed out on a lot of what I have wanted to show, and reveal, here.

you've failed to reveal anything interesting to anybody with all that.

Once again, what I want to, and am, showing and revealing was never intended for you, personally, nor for anyone else posting here, in this forum.

That's kinda gross

[Age]

It can be random and it can be not random. So overall it's not random.

I don't see why overall it's not random. If it's sometimes random, why is it overall not random?
And why are we rolling our eyes now?

Because you are free to choose to have reasons which makes it not random.

Once again you are completely and utterly missing the actual questions being asked to you here "atla".

you are not being asked about if you choose to have reasons, like, for example, you choose to have a particular kind of ice cream for the reason you like that ice cream, but why in each and every choice that you have made in your whole life have you choice 'the choice' you made?

Were you absolutely free to make absolutely every one of those countless choices, or did all, or any, of 'those choices' happen 'randomly'?

Also, and by the way, if you, really, did, already, know what you were 'talking about', then you could have, already, just answered this very simple and easy basic question.

And I'm rolling my eyes because at this point you're like VA with his "God is impossible" or "realism is impossible" crusades. Let's destroy the concept of free will.

LOL you have not, yet, even provided a 'concept' of 'free will' that works, or that could even work.

If you want to fight and/or argue that 'free will' exists, then choose 'your words' better, and just prove, irrefutably, that 'free will' exists.

It is, after all, just a Truly very simple and easy thing to do.

[Age]

I don't see why overall it's not random. If it's sometimes random, why is it overall not random?
And why are we rolling our eyes now?

Because you are free to choose to have reasons which makes it not random.

And I'm rolling my eyes because at this point you're like VA with his "God is impossible" or "realism is impossible" crusades. Let's destroy the concept of free will.

So when you chose that number you made 2 choices? One to be random and then another to choose the number itself?

I don't really know what your second paragraph means at all tbh

What the second paragraph means is that "atla" believes that you are trying to destroy the 'concept' of 'free will' that "atla" has, and is holding onto, for 'dear life', as some would say. And, which, by the way, 'a concept' that "atla", "itself, cannot even just define for 'us' here.

"atla" is saying and claiming that you are doing what "veritas aequitas" does, and, hypocritically, which "atla" is doing "itself" right here anyway, and that is just believing some thing is true and so just fighting and arguing for a belief with about nothing to back up and support 'the belief'.

[Atla]

If you want to fight and/or argue that 'free will' exists

What level of mental retardation must you have to not realize that I'm not arguing for free will, nor do I believe in it.

[Age]

Because you are free to choose to have reasons which makes it not random.

And I'm rolling my eyes because at this point you're like VA with his "God is impossible" or "realism is impossible" crusades. Let's destroy the concept of free will.

So when you chose that number you made 2 choices? One to be random and then another to choose the number itself?

I don't really know what your second paragraph means at all tbh

Free will is a simple philosophical idea, why are you so freaked out by it?

LOL 'a simple philosophical idea', yet adult human beings have been bickering and fighting over this, supposed and alleged, 'simple philosophical idea', for thousands of years up to when this is being written.

And, it is such a, supposed, 'simple philosophical idea', although "atla" is completely and utterly incapable of just 'explaining the idea', itself.

Also, notice the attempt to 'deflect', and to deceive and fool the readers to 'look at' 'the other', and 'see' 'them' as somehow wrong here?

"atla" is 'trying to' claim that 'another' is so-called 'freaked out'. But what is actually happening and occurring here are others are 'trying to' just get "atla" to just defend its 'currently' held onto belief and position, which, obviously, it is absolutely failing to do so on all accounts.

[Age]

So when you chose that number you made 2 choices? One to be random and then another to choose the number itself?

I don't really know what your second paragraph means at all tbh

Free will is a simple philosophical idea, why are you so freaked out by it?

I don't understand why you think anything I've said indicates a "freaking out".

"atla" does not, really, 'think' this'. "atla" is only saying this to 'try to' deflect, to get the readers to not 'look at' its own inadequacies here, and is 'trying to' get them to 'look at', and 'judge', 'you', instead.

Why are you freaking out from the words I'm saying.

Because they are pointing out and showing and revealing the failings in "atla's" beliefs and claims here.

I also think you're the last person to vouch for how simple it is, given your understanding is clearly drastically different from just about everyone else's.

[Iwannaplato]

you've failed to reveal anything interesting to anybody with all that.

Once again, what I want to, and am, showing and revealing was never intended for you, personally, nor for anyone else posting here, in this forum.

That's kinda gross

I will just say that somehow you have been managing to draw forth a clearer version of Age. Here, for example: I have seen him write many, many times that people posting here are not necessarily his intended audience, which is an absurdly useless contribution.

But here he just says we are not.

You got the touch, FJ.

[Age]

Free will is a simple philosophical idea, why are you so freaked out by it?

I don't understand why you think anything I've said indicates a "freaking out". Why are you freaking out from the words I'm saying.

I think we're done here.

This was a typical response, from those back when this was being written, when they could not stand behind, and back up and support, their beliefs nor claims.

Saying 'we' are done here, is 'trying to' put some of 'the blame' on 'the other'.

So, again, I will suggest that absolutely every one obtains absolute proof for absolutely any thing that they want to say and claim here, before they make their views or beliefs publicly known here.

[Age]

But, who ever thought, let alone presumed or believed that "pete" had a monopoly, here?

Literally everyone who gets annoyed about compatibilists having an adjusted definition of free will. Atla for example.

I have already talked about how there are no such actual things as so-called "compatibilists".

[Age]

"This one" could refer for me or atla.

Thank you for pointing this, glaringly obvious fact on a second look, out for me here.

Just say who you're talking about.

"atla"

If you reply to atlq and you mean atla, say you.

Please do not choose 'my words' for 'me'.

Sure, I might not write Correctly, nor even any good at all some times, but I would prefer to choose 'my own words'.

By the way, I really do love having pointed out where I am Wrong, and why I am Wrong, but telling 'me' what words to use, or not use, I do not like.

If you mean me, say flannel Jesus. You want to learn how to communicate more clearly, this is part of it.

Yes I agree, wholeheartedly.

I, MISTAKENLY, assumed that who I was referring to would just be known. So, thank you again for pointing out my MISGIVINGS, or Wrong doing, here.

[Flannel Jesus]

But, who ever thought, let alone presumed or believed that "pete" had a monopoly, here?

Literally everyone who gets annoyed about compatibilists having an adjusted definition of free will. Atla for example.

I have already talked about how there are no such actual things as so-called "compatibilists".

So what? So what if you've already talked about it? If you've already talked about it that makes it true? Saying you've already talked about it isn't a cogent point at all. I've already talked about how you're wrong. And whatever your reply is, I've already talked about how that's wrong. That means I win, because I've already talked about it. You see how stupid this "already talked about it" crap is?. It's nonsense. It didn't mean anything.

If you have an argument to make, post it. Don't say you've already posted it, that's worse than useless. I don't care what you already said m

[Age]

you've failed to reveal anything interesting to anybody with all that.

Once again, what I want to, and am, showing and revealing was never intended for you, personally, nor for anyone else posting here, in this forum.

That's kinda gross

I have no idea nor clue as to how nor why you would find that 'kind of gross'.

I will, however, suggest that you just stop with all assumptions when reading my words, and removing absolutely any and all presumptions, and just 'look at' my words from a Truly open perspective, only.

Maybe just 'see' my words, or just take my words, as a 'puzzle', and/or 'riddle', only. Knowing that 'one day' it will all be solved, or better worded, 're-solved', once, and for all.

And, like all puzzles or riddles not all people 'get it', and 'understand it', at first, or even at all. But, once one 'gets it', then they can reveal 'it' to others, obviously if they 'choose to'.

There is absolutely nothing at all 'gross' in what I said, and meant, there. So, any assumption of there being any is, literally, in 'that head', only.

Now, I could ask you, 'Why did you assume absolutely anything 'gross' here?' And, if I did, then what would you inform the readers here?