Free will

[bahman]

Free will by definition is the ability to unbiasedly choose between at least two options.

To WHO or to WHAT is this 'the definition' of 'free will'?

And, if this is 'the definition' of 'free will' to some of 'you', human beings, then there is now NO wonder WHY those ones were STILL ATTEMPTING to argue or fight over that absolutely RIDICULOUS question of; 'free will' OR 'determinism'?

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

To show that free will is real we discuss three different situations that which a free decision is needed. We consider a situation with only two options, A and B. We may like A more than B and choose A. This is a non-free decision that we call it conditional decision. We may like A and B equally and choose one of them. It is clear that we cannot be biased by one of the options so our decision is free in such a situation.

HOW would 'you' KNOW 'this'? And, WHY would 'you' ASSUME 'this'?

Is it POSSIBLE to 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' ABSOLUTELY 'equally'?

And, IF 'you' do 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' EQUALLY, then WHY did 'you' CHOOSE 'one' OVER 'the other'?

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

There are situations that which the future outcome of A or B is not known.

Like 'what', for example?

Again we cannot be biased by one of the options yet we can decide so such a decision is free too.

Like 'what', 'where', or 'when', for example, EXACTLY?

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

We may like A more than B but we have the power to choose B for no specific reason.

THEN, WHY CHANGE 'your' DECISION?

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

This is again a free decision since we were biased by A but we were able to choose B.

But if you were 'biased', or there was a 'bias', then there was NOT the ability to 'unbiasedly choose', OBVIOUSLY.

So, I suggest STARTING AGAIN 'trying to' LOOK FOR words that you might be able USE, which could ACTUALLY back up and support your, obviously, CURRENTLY HELD BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS here.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

[bahman]

Whatever free will is, it is completely deterministic.

No, a deterministic system goes from one state to another state. Decision matters when we are faced with at least two options or two states (options that need free decision as they are described in OP) so a deterministic system cannot evolve any further when it reaches such a situation.

It is BECAUSE OF the way you Wrongly described 'things' in the opening post WHY 'you', and "others", are STILL SO LOST and CONFUSED here.

No, it is because you don't understand what I am trying to say here.

The only way the phrase makes sense is to describe a condition where an agent can act without being compelled from external forces, but act solely on their own determination.

Yes, that is how I defined free will.

When do an act of will, it is determined by prevailing conditions. For each of us choices are made base on our personal experience and motivation. It is wholly biased to our own way of thinking.
And thus an act of free will is 100% biased on our OWN needs, wants, and motivations.

No. I have already given three situations that need, want, or motivation cannot help or do not matter.

LOL "bahman" you have just 'tried to' say SOME 'thing' that you HOPED or BELIEVED would back up and support your CURRENTLY HELD BELIEF. But, it is with deep sorrow I am saddened to SAY, what you SAID here does NOT back up and support your CLAIM and BELIEF here. Those situations just do NOT WORK for you.

Have you ever had options in your life?

[Age]

Whatever free will is, it is completely deterministic.

And, it could be argued what was completely pre-'determined' comes about because of 'free will'.

As will 'come-to-light', soon enough.

I won't hold my breath.

We were, and are, NOT waiting for you to.

ONLY WHEN, and IF, ANY one is INTERESTED ENOUGH in LEARNING and SEEING 'things', in OTHER WAYS than what they STEADFASTLY HOLD to be ABSOLUTELY TRUE, or in other words, properly AND correctly, then what IS IRREFUTABLY True CAN and WILL come-to-light.

The only way the phrase makes sense is to describe a condition where an agent can act without being compelled from external forces, but act solely on their own determination.

If by 'the phrase' you mean 'free will', then there is ANOTHER WAY to make sense of this ALL.

When do an act of will, it is determined by prevailing conditions. For each of us choices are made base on our personal experience and motivation. It is wholly biased to our own way of thinking.
And thus an act of free will is 100% biased on our OWN needs, wants, and motivations.

[Age]

"skepdick" are you aware that the "ass" did NOT DIE in ACTUAL REAL LIFE, and that 'it' ONLY 'died' in PRETEND?

Very much so. Demonstrating that the donkey was biased one way or another.

So, to you A MADE UP STORY, which has an OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect story line to it, is enough for you to ACCEPT as DEMONSTRATING 'PROOF' for some 'thing', correct?

And, that did NOT 'demonstrate' ANY such thing.

WHY is that example and made up STORY, NOT about a human being?

Was the animal, and word, "ass" USED to TRICK and FOOL some of 'you' INTO BELIEVING that that STORY 'demonstrates' 'that', what the STORY TELLER BELIEVES WHOLEHEARTEDLY is an ABSOLUTE Fact, and which they WANT 'you' to BELIEVE is true AS WELL?

[Age]

His death is not our concern. The point is that he can choose one.

What do you mean by "can" when it's obvious he isn't choosing either?!?

OBVIOUSLY, we can NOT, accurately, and thus properly, answer your clarifying question here UNTIL we have been FULLY INFORMED of ALL the circumstances surrounding that OBVIOUSLY VERY FICTIONAL, MADE UP STORY.

So, WHY did this MADE UP and FICTIONAL "ass" DECIDE that 'it' WANTED to DIE, instead of CHOOSING to LIVE in the FIRST PLACE?

[Age]

Free will by definition is the ability to unbiasedly choose between at least two options.

To WHO or to WHAT is this 'the definition' of 'free will'?

And, if this is 'the definition' of 'free will' to some of 'you', human beings, then there is now NO wonder WHY those ones were STILL ATTEMPTING to argue or fight over that absolutely RIDICULOUS question of; 'free will' OR 'determinism'?

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

AND, 'wiki', just like 'you', "bahman", as well as the rest of 'you', adult human beings, STILL have NOT YET worked out and SOLVED, what has been PUZZLING 'you', human beings, for centuries now, (when this was being written). So, OBVIOUSLY, there is some 'thing' Wrong or AMISS here, correct?

Could 'that', what is Wrong or AMISS here, JUST BE the definition/s that 'you', human beings, have been CHOOSING and USING?

Or, is that JUST NOT a possibility, in your OWN 'little worlds'?

To show that free will is real we discuss three different situations that which a free decision is needed. We consider a situation with only two options, A and B. We may like A more than B and choose A. This is a non-free decision that we call it conditional decision. We may like A and B equally and choose one of them. It is clear that we cannot be biased by one of the options so our decision is free in such a situation.

HOW would 'you' KNOW 'this'? And, WHY would 'you' ASSUME 'this'?

Is it POSSIBLE to 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' ABSOLUTELY 'equally'?

And, IF 'you' do 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' EQUALLY, then WHY did 'you' CHOOSE 'one' OVER 'the other'?

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

Because you are ABLE to choose one, is NEVER in doubt, and has NEVER been DISPUTED by ANY one. Well not that I am YET AWARE OF.

However, it is because of 'your' WANT, which is what EVERY one here that is DISAGREEING or DISPUTING 'you' is QUESTIONING and CHALLENGING 'you' ON and ABOUT.

WHY 'you' WANTED 'that one', (whatever that might be), is what 'you' are being TOLD IS 'the bias'. And, as you have been CONTINUALLY TOLD and INFORMED OF ALSO, it is 'the bias' (the 'want' for 'that one'), which 'you' OBVIOUSLY have, which has just as OBVIOUSLY come from pre-existing conditions that 'you', (or more correctly 'that body') has OBVIOUSLY previously experienced, which is WHY 'that choice' of 'yours' was NOT a 'free-will' choice. That is; going on your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND this now?

There are situations that which the future outcome of A or B is not known.

Like 'what', for example?

Again we cannot be biased by one of the options yet we can decide so such a decision is free too.

Like 'what', 'where', or 'when', for example, EXACTLY?

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

The reason WHY 'you' WANT 'to invest', is A 'bias'. Thus, NOT 'free will', according to your OWN definition of 'free will'.

The reason WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment', which 'you' finally did, would have been based on AGAIN, your WANT and thus your 'biases'. Thus, NOT 'free will' AGAIN, according to your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

The SOLE REASON WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment' strategy, literally, of YOUR CHOICE, was BECAUSE 'you' thought or BELIEVED it would be the BEST 'one' for 'you' to OBTAIN MORE monetary gains.

So, YOUR BIASES came into PLAY. Thus, 'determinism' AT WORK here and NOT 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

We may like A more than B but we have the power to choose B for no specific reason.

THEN, WHY CHANGE 'your' DECISION?

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

What 'you' do NOT 'like' IS what 'you' do NOT 'want'. Thus, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' do NOT 'like' NOR 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Also, and conversely, what 'you' DO 'like' IS what 'you' DO 'want'. Therefore, AGAIN, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' DO 'like' AND 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

This is again a free decision since we were biased by A but we were able to choose B.

But if you were 'biased', or there was a 'bias', then there was NOT the ability to 'unbiasedly choose', OBVIOUSLY.

So, I suggest STARTING AGAIN 'trying to' LOOK FOR words that you might be able USE, which could ACTUALLY back up and support your, obviously, CURRENTLY HELD BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS here.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE for 'us' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Then 'we', AT LEAST, have SOME 'thing' to DISCUSS and, literally, TALK ABOUT.

[Age]

No, a deterministic system goes from one state to another state. Decision matters when we are faced with at least two options or two states (options that need free decision as they are described in OP) so a deterministic system cannot evolve any further when it reaches such a situation.

It is BECAUSE OF the way you Wrongly described 'things' in the opening post WHY 'you', and "others", are STILL SO LOST and CONFUSED here.

No, it is because you don't understand what I am trying to say here.

LOL "bahman". If only 'you' KNEW.

Yes, that is how I defined free will.


No. I have already given three situations that need, want, or motivation cannot help or do not matter.

LOL "bahman" you have just 'tried to' say SOME 'thing' that you HOPED or BELIEVED would back up and support your CURRENTLY HELD BELIEF. But, it is with deep sorrow I am saddened to SAY, what you SAID here does NOT back up and support your CLAIM and BELIEF here. Those situations just do NOT WORK for you.

Have you ever had options in your life?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

[bahman]

To WHO or to WHAT is this 'the definition' of 'free will'?

And, if this is 'the definition' of 'free will' to some of 'you', human beings, then there is now NO wonder WHY those ones were STILL ATTEMPTING to argue or fight over that absolutely RIDICULOUS question of; 'free will' OR 'determinism'?

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

AND, 'wiki', just like 'you', "bahman", as well as the rest of 'you', adult human beings, STILL have NOT YET worked out and SOLVED, what has been PUZZLING 'you', human beings, for centuries now, (when this was being written). So, OBVIOUSLY, there is some 'thing' Wrong or AMISS here, correct?

Could 'that', what is Wrong or AMISS here, JUST BE the definition/s that 'you', human beings, have been CHOOSING and USING?

Or, is that JUST NOT a possibility, in your OWN 'little worlds'?

No, No, and No.

HOW would 'you' KNOW 'this'? And, WHY would 'you' ASSUME 'this'?

Is it POSSIBLE to 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' ABSOLUTELY 'equally'?

And, IF 'you' do 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' EQUALLY, then WHY did 'you' CHOOSE 'one' OVER 'the other'?

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

Because you are ABLE to choose one, is NEVER in doubt, and has NEVER been DISPUTED by ANY one. Well not that I am YET AWARE OF.

However, it is because of 'your' WANT, which is what EVERY one here that is DISAGREEING or DISPUTING 'you' is QUESTIONING and CHALLENGING 'you' ON and ABOUT.

WHY 'you' WANTED 'that one', (whatever that might be), is what 'you' are being TOLD IS 'the bias'. And, as you have been CONTINUALLY TOLD and INFORMED OF ALSO, it is 'the bias' (the 'want' for 'that one'), which 'you' OBVIOUSLY have, which has just as OBVIOUSLY come from pre-existing conditions that 'you', (or more correctly 'that body') has OBVIOUSLY previously experienced, which is WHY 'that choice' of 'yours' was NOT a 'free-will' choice. That is; going on your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND this now?

I can decide on one option for no specific reason.

Like 'what', for example?


Like 'what', 'where', or 'when', for example, EXACTLY?

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

The reason WHY 'you' WANT 'to invest', is A 'bias'. Thus, NOT 'free will', according to your OWN definition of 'free will'.

The reason WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment', which 'you' finally did, would have been based on AGAIN, your WANT and thus your 'biases'. Thus, NOT 'free will' AGAIN, according to your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

The SOLE REASON WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment' strategy, literally, of YOUR CHOICE, was BECAUSE 'you' thought or BELIEVED it would be the BEST 'one' for 'you' to OBTAIN MORE monetary gains.

So, YOUR BIASES came into PLAY. Thus, 'determinism' AT WORK here and NOT 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

You don't understand again. Have you ever had doubt about what option to choose in a situation?

THEN, WHY CHANGE 'your' DECISION?

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

What 'you' do NOT 'like' IS what 'you' do NOT 'want'. Thus, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' do NOT 'like' NOR 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Also, and conversely, what 'you' DO 'like' IS what 'you' DO 'want'. Therefore, AGAIN, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' DO 'like' AND 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

So choosing what I don't like is determined? Again you don't understand a word.

But if you were 'biased', or there was a 'bias', then there was NOT the ability to 'unbiasedly choose', OBVIOUSLY.

So, I suggest STARTING AGAIN 'trying to' LOOK FOR words that you might be able USE, which could ACTUALLY back up and support your, obviously, CURRENTLY HELD BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS here.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE for 'us' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Then 'we', AT LEAST, have SOME 'thing' to DISCUSS and, literally, TALK ABOUT.

Please read OP.

[bahman]

It is BECAUSE OF the way you Wrongly described 'things' in the opening post WHY 'you', and "others", are STILL SO LOST and CONFUSED here.

No, it is because you don't understand what I am trying to say here.

LOL "bahman". If only 'you' KNEW.

LOL "bahman" you have just 'tried to' say SOME 'thing' that you HOPED or BELIEVED would back up and support your CURRENTLY HELD BELIEF. But, it is with deep sorrow I am saddened to SAY, what you SAID here does NOT back up and support your CLAIM and BELIEF here. Those situations just do NOT WORK for you.

Have you ever had options in your life?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Have you ever doubted which option to take?

[Age]

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

AND, 'wiki', just like 'you', "bahman", as well as the rest of 'you', adult human beings, STILL have NOT YET worked out and SOLVED, what has been PUZZLING 'you', human beings, for centuries now, (when this was being written). So, OBVIOUSLY, there is some 'thing' Wrong or AMISS here, correct?

Could 'that', what is Wrong or AMISS here, JUST BE the definition/s that 'you', human beings, have been CHOOSING and USING?

Or, is that JUST NOT a possibility, in your OWN 'little worlds'?

No, No, and No.

So, although 'you', human beings, have NEVER even come close to working out and agreeing upon on what thee ACTUAL and iRREFUTABLE Truth IS here, 'you', "bahman", STILL BELIEVE that there is absolutely NOTHING AMISS nor Wrong AT ALL here.

Which is a GREAT EXAMPLE of just how much BELIEFS can lead people completely ASTRAY.

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

Because you are ABLE to choose one, is NEVER in doubt, and has NEVER been DISPUTED by ANY one. Well not that I am YET AWARE OF.

However, it is because of 'your' WANT, which is what EVERY one here that is DISAGREEING or DISPUTING 'you' is QUESTIONING and CHALLENGING 'you' ON and ABOUT.

WHY 'you' WANTED 'that one', (whatever that might be), is what 'you' are being TOLD IS 'the bias'. And, as you have been CONTINUALLY TOLD and INFORMED OF ALSO, it is 'the bias' (the 'want' for 'that one'), which 'you' OBVIOUSLY have, which has just as OBVIOUSLY come from pre-existing conditions that 'you', (or more correctly 'that body') has OBVIOUSLY previously experienced, which is WHY 'that choice' of 'yours' was NOT a 'free-will' choice. That is; going on your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND this now?

I can decide on one option for no specific reason.

If you provide us with AN EXAMPLE, then we will be ABLE TO LOOK AT, and SEE, if there is absolutely NO reason AT ALL. Until then you could just be MAKING THIS UP, based solely upon your OWN BELIEFS here.

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

The reason WHY 'you' WANT 'to invest', is A 'bias'. Thus, NOT 'free will', according to your OWN definition of 'free will'.

The reason WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment', which 'you' finally did, would have been based on AGAIN, your WANT and thus your 'biases'. Thus, NOT 'free will' AGAIN, according to your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

The SOLE REASON WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment' strategy, literally, of YOUR CHOICE, was BECAUSE 'you' thought or BELIEVED it would be the BEST 'one' for 'you' to OBTAIN MORE monetary gains.

So, YOUR BIASES came into PLAY. Thus, 'determinism' AT WORK here and NOT 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

You don't understand again.

LOL The ONE who is NOT 'understanding' here, is VERY OBVIOUS.

Have you ever had doubt about what option to choose in a situation?

OF COURSE. ALL, after a certain age, HAVE.

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

What 'you' do NOT 'like' IS what 'you' do NOT 'want'. Thus, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' do NOT 'like' NOR 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Also, and conversely, what 'you' DO 'like' IS what 'you' DO 'want'. Therefore, AGAIN, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' DO 'like' AND 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

So choosing what I don't like is determined?

YES.

'your' CHOICE, is based upon what the senses of that body DO, or do NOT, 'like'. It is those senses that have INFLUENCED 'you' to what 'you', DO, or do NOT, like.

Again you don't understand a word.

What thee ACTUAL Truth IS here for ALL to LOOK AT, and SEE.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE for 'us' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Then 'we', AT LEAST, have SOME 'thing' to DISCUSS and, literally, TALK ABOUT.

Please read OP.

As EXPECTED, 'you' RUN AWAY and/or 'try to' DEFLECT when 'you' are UNABLE TO provide absolutely ANY example AT ALL.

Providing the letters 'A' and 'B' is NOT an EXAMPLE.

I suggest 'you' PROVIDE an ACTUAL EXAMPLE of when 'you' have made an ACTUAL 'unbiased' CHOICE. Until then there is, literally, NOTHING of ANY worth, in your opening post, NOR in the rest of what 'you' wrote here, to LOOK AT and SEE in regards to being able to back up and support what 'you' obviously STEADFASTLY BELIEVE and CLAIM is true.

[Age]

No, it is because you don't understand what I am trying to say here.

LOL "bahman". If only 'you' KNEW.

Have you ever had options in your life?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Have you ever doubted which option to take?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

[bahman]

To WHO or to WHAT is this 'the definition' of 'free will'?

And, if this is 'the definition' of 'free will' to some of 'you', human beings, then there is now NO wonder WHY those ones were STILL ATTEMPTING to argue or fight over that absolutely RIDICULOUS question of; 'free will' OR 'determinism'?

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

AND, 'wiki', just like 'you', "bahman", as well as the rest of 'you', adult human beings, STILL have NOT YET worked out and SOLVED, what has been PUZZLING 'you', human beings, for centuries now, (when this was being written). So, OBVIOUSLY, there is some 'thing' Wrong or AMISS here, correct?

Could 'that', what is Wrong or AMISS here, JUST BE the definition/s that 'you', human beings, have been CHOOSING and USING?

Or, is that JUST NOT a possibility, in your OWN 'little worlds'?

My definition is pretty fine and correct. What is your definition of free will?

HOW would 'you' KNOW 'this'? And, WHY would 'you' ASSUME 'this'?

Is it POSSIBLE to 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' ABSOLUTELY 'equally'?

And, IF 'you' do 'like' two DIFFERENT 'things' EQUALLY, then WHY did 'you' CHOOSE 'one' OVER 'the other'?

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

Because you are ABLE to choose one, is NEVER in doubt, and has NEVER been DISPUTED by ANY one. Well not that I am YET AWARE OF.

However, it is because of 'your' WANT, which is what EVERY one here that is DISAGREEING or DISPUTING 'you' is QUESTIONING and CHALLENGING 'you' ON and ABOUT.

WHY 'you' WANTED 'that one', (whatever that might be), is what 'you' are being TOLD IS 'the bias'. And, as you have been CONTINUALLY TOLD and INFORMED OF ALSO, it is 'the bias' (the 'want' for 'that one'), which 'you' OBVIOUSLY have, which has just as OBVIOUSLY come from pre-existing conditions that 'you', (or more correctly 'that body') has OBVIOUSLY previously experienced, which is WHY 'that choice' of 'yours' was NOT a 'free-will' choice. That is; going on your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND this now?

No, I am able to pick up an option that I don't like which means that I can go against the bias.

Like 'what', for example?


Like 'what', 'where', or 'when', for example, EXACTLY?

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

The reason WHY 'you' WANT 'to invest', is A 'bias'. Thus, NOT 'free will', according to your OWN definition of 'free will'.

The reason WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment', which 'you' finally did, would have been based on AGAIN, your WANT and thus your 'biases'. Thus, NOT 'free will' AGAIN, according to your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

The SOLE REASON WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment' strategy, literally, of YOUR CHOICE, was BECAUSE 'you' thought or BELIEVED it would be the BEST 'one' for 'you' to OBTAIN MORE monetary gains.

So, YOUR BIASES came into PLAY. Thus, 'determinism' AT WORK here and NOT 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do you understand the difference between the situation and the decision?

THEN, WHY CHANGE 'your' DECISION?

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

What 'you' do NOT 'like' IS what 'you' do NOT 'want'. Thus, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' do NOT 'like' NOR 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Also, and conversely, what 'you' DO 'like' IS what 'you' DO 'want'. Therefore, AGAIN, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' DO 'like' AND 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

But if you were 'biased', or there was a 'bias', then there was NOT the ability to 'unbiasedly choose', OBVIOUSLY.

So, I suggest STARTING AGAIN 'trying to' LOOK FOR words that you might be able USE, which could ACTUALLY back up and support your, obviously, CURRENTLY HELD BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS here.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE for 'us' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Then 'we', AT LEAST, have SOME 'thing' to DISCUSS and, literally, TALK ABOUT.

Read OP.

[bahman]

LOL "bahman". If only 'you' KNEW.


YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Have you ever doubted which option to take?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Have you ever been able to choose when you doubted?

[Age]

This is my definition. The wiki definition is similar to mine.

AND, 'wiki', just like 'you', "bahman", as well as the rest of 'you', adult human beings, STILL have NOT YET worked out and SOLVED, what has been PUZZLING 'you', human beings, for centuries now, (when this was being written). So, OBVIOUSLY, there is some 'thing' Wrong or AMISS here, correct?

Could 'that', what is Wrong or AMISS here, JUST BE the definition/s that 'you', human beings, have been CHOOSING and USING?

Or, is that JUST NOT a possibility, in your OWN 'little worlds'?

My definition is pretty fine and correct.

To WHOM, EXACTLY?

What is your definition of free will?

The ABILITY TO CHOOSE.

Oh, and by the way, thanks for asking.

See, with this definition, BOTH 'free will' AND 'determinism' 'play a part in Life'. With BOTH being ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER, PEFECTLY. And, which REMOVES ANY form of DISAGREEING and DISAGREEMENT. When then ALSO RESOLVES QUESTIONING and the back and forth BICKERING and "ARGUING" that has gone on for too long now, when this was being written.

Because I want to pick one and I am able to choose one.

Because you are ABLE to choose one, is NEVER in doubt, and has NEVER been DISPUTED by ANY one. Well not that I am YET AWARE OF.

However, it is because of 'your' WANT, which is what EVERY one here that is DISAGREEING or DISPUTING 'you' is QUESTIONING and CHALLENGING 'you' ON and ABOUT.

WHY 'you' WANTED 'that one', (whatever that might be), is what 'you' are being TOLD IS 'the bias'. And, as you have been CONTINUALLY TOLD and INFORMED OF ALSO, it is 'the bias' (the 'want' for 'that one'), which 'you' OBVIOUSLY have, which has just as OBVIOUSLY come from pre-existing conditions that 'you', (or more correctly 'that body') has OBVIOUSLY previously experienced, which is WHY 'that choice' of 'yours' was NOT a 'free-will' choice. That is; going on your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND this now?

No, I am able to pick up an option that I don't like which means that I can go against the bias.

BUT you are, OBVIOUSLY, GOING FOR the 'bias', which you LIKE. That is; you LIKE to CHOOSE the option that you think or BELIEVE would PROVE the "other" wrong, and 'you' right. Which WAS done on the HOPE of being ABLE TO back up and support YOUR BELIEF here.

You did NOT 'just choose' the OTHER option for absolutely NO reason AT ALL. 'you' CHOSE the one, which 'you' SUPPOSEDLY do NOT like, to WIN 'the argument' here. 'To WIN' WAS and IS 'your' BIAS here.

Like when you want to invest in a market but you don't know the future outcome of your investing.

The reason WHY 'you' WANT 'to invest', is A 'bias'. Thus, NOT 'free will', according to your OWN definition of 'free will'.

The reason WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment', which 'you' finally did, would have been based on AGAIN, your WANT and thus your 'biases'. Thus, NOT 'free will' AGAIN, according to your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

The SOLE REASON WHY 'you' ended up CHOOSING 'the investment' strategy, literally, of YOUR CHOICE, was BECAUSE 'you' thought or BELIEVED it would be the BEST 'one' for 'you' to OBTAIN MORE monetary gains.

So, YOUR BIASES came into PLAY. Thus, 'determinism' AT WORK here and NOT 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Do you understand the difference between the situation and the decision?

YES.

Have you been UNDERSTANDING what I have been SAYING and WRITING here?

I don't change my decision. I decide why I don't like.

What 'you' do NOT 'like' IS what 'you' do NOT 'want'. Thus, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' do NOT 'like' NOR 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

Also, and conversely, what 'you' DO 'like' IS what 'you' DO 'want'. Therefore, AGAIN, the DECISION 'you' MAKE on what 'you' DO 'like' AND 'want' here is based on 'determinism' and NOT on 'free will', from your OWN definition of 'free will' here.

There is this ability to choose unbiasedly. I can do this, you can do this.

PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE for 'us' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Then 'we', AT LEAST, have SOME 'thing' to DISCUSS and, literally, TALK ABOUT.

Read OP.

CHOOSING BETWEEN A OR B, is NOT a REAL ACTUAL EXAMPLE that 'you' have ACTUALLY DONE in Life.

ALSO, I HAD ALREADY REPLIED TO THIS, the FIRST TIME you RESPONDED with that RIDICULOUS REMARK. You OBVIOUSLY ARE IGNORING IT, so here IT is AGAIN.

I REPLIED WITH:

As EXPECTED, 'you' RUN AWAY and/or 'try to' DEFLECT when 'you' are UNABLE TO provide absolutely ANY example AT ALL.

Providing the letters 'A' and 'B' is NOT an EXAMPLE.

I suggest 'you' PROVIDE an ACTUAL EXAMPLE of when 'you' have made an ACTUAL 'unbiased' CHOICE. Until then there is, literally, NOTHING of ANY worth, in your opening post, NOR in the rest of what 'you' wrote here, to LOOK AT and SEE in regards to being able to back up and support what 'you' obviously STEADFASTLY BELIEVE and CLAIM is true.

[Age]

Have you ever doubted which option to take?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Have you ever been able to choose when you doubted?

YES, OBVIOUSLY.

If I had NOT, then I would have ALREADY OBTAINED ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing that I have WANTED out of Life.