Philosophy Now Forum

How can we have free will and experience hunger?

All living things are coerced into doing things by hunger, hunger is painful and cannot be ignored. Even the most intelligent human will, when hungry, think only of acquiring food. Our actions are governed by hunger, thirst, tiredness, the need for sex etc. These are fundamental 'needs', such as those in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. All of these needs cause discomfort when not addressed. How can anyone experience these needs and still maintain that we have free will?

Humans are capable of resisting these needs, such as resisting hunger when dieting. However this resistance is caused by a greater need, perhaps the need to be accepted or find a mate.

I conclude that all human actions are caused by human needs. Therefore we have no free will, we are simply machines waiting for our need for 'x' to reach a certain level at which point we must address it.

What are your thoughts on this theory?

I think beauty was at the tip of Maslows hierarchy, wasn't it? Which would seem to place abstract things of greater order than base requirements. I think that to be true, but I think the top need is the need to will freely, but until we are able to do that we are still dependant on the forces of circumstance and destiny in one way or another. Can we escape?.. if only just for a moment?

Worth the attempt I think.

MisterMaggot wrote:How can we have free will and experience hunger?

All living things are coerced into doing things by hunger, hunger is painful and cannot be ignored. Even the most intelligent human will, when hungry, think only of acquiring food. Our actions are governed by hunger, thirst, tiredness, the need for sex etc. These are fundamental 'needs', such as those in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. All of these needs cause discomfort when not addressed. How can anyone experience these needs and still maintain that we have free will?

Humans are capable of resisting these needs, such as resisting hunger when dieting. However this resistance is caused by a greater need, perhaps the need to be accepted or find a mate.

I conclude that all human actions are caused by human needs. Therefore we have no free will, we are simply machines waiting for our need for 'x' to reach a certain level at which point we must address it.

What are your thoughts on this theory?

So, those choosing to fast are compelled by what desire?

all the best, urban

Several human needs can be felt at the same time, Mr Maggot. And often they conflict with each other.

Example:

I have the need to eat chocolate ice-cream and I have the need to lose weight and feel more pretty and get a mate in order to procreate.

Because of our free will we are able to decide which need is more important and should get satisfied and which need should get frustrated.
Reason provides arguments pro and contra and free will executes the result of the decision taken.

MisterMaggot wrote:How can we have free will and experience hunger?

All living things are coerced into doing things by hunger, hunger is painful and cannot be ignored. Even the most intelligent human will, when hungry, think only of acquiring food. Our actions are governed by hunger, thirst, tiredness, the need for sex etc. These are fundamental 'needs', such as those in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. All of these needs cause discomfort when not addressed. How can anyone experience these needs and still maintain that we have free will?

Humans are capable of resisting these needs, such as resisting hunger when dieting. However this resistance is caused by a greater need, perhaps the need to be accepted or find a mate.

I conclude that all human actions are caused by human needs. Therefore we have no free will, we are simply machines waiting for our need for 'x' to reach a certain level at which point we must address it.

What are your thoughts on this theory?

We are human, as such we have human free will. An animal that flies has the free will to fly, one that swims has the free will to swim. I would like to spread my arms, and fly around the cosmos, but I do not consider, that I do not have free will, just because humans can't fly. Obviously, free will can only be found within the constraints of the entity in question.

The real area of consideration, as to any humans ability/inability to experience true human free will, rests with knowledge, and oppression.

When I feel hungry I do not have to rush to the fridge like a mindless animal would naturally do.

I can remember:

1. When we are hungry the cell-repairing mechanisms set in, as I learned from the reports about the experiments with Owen and Canto.
So the feeling of hunger can be associated with a positive message: my cells are getting repaired, lovely, who needs cancer ?

2. The feeling of hunger stops after a few minutes, which I have experienced several times so far.

3. If I do not eat anything else today I will sleep like a stone, wake up refreshed and get up lusting for breakfast. This has happened serveral times and has been a very positive experience.

4. ...................

5. ..............

And then make a choice.

duszek wrote:When I feel hungry I do not have to rush to the fridge like a mindless animal would naturally do.

I can remember:

And then make a choice.

can you remember freely?
do you have to make or not to make a choice?

duszek wrote: Because of our free will we are able to decide which need is more important and should get satisfied and which need should get frustrated.
Reason provides arguments pro and contra and free will executes the result of the decision taken.

but how our will is free? we have to decide which need is more important and should get satisfied and which need should get frustrated? what do you call free and why? do you think autonomous processes and agents when you say free? like free as a bird in romantic poetry book?

I propose to call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire.

Example:
I feel very much like eating one more piece of chocolate.
But.
I want to get a strong will power because I read a book with the title "On Desire" by Mr Irvine and I think that if I get a strong will then I will be able to achieve A, B, C and D and these four objectives are crucial to me because of some very idealistic considerations.

So: I make an effort of will and do not eat one more piece of chocolate.

Another example:
I feel like drinking one glass of beer. But I am an alcoholic and I want to quit in order to lead a booze-free life because ... of some idealistic considerations.
So I choose not to drink the beer.

duszek wrote:I propose to call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire.

Example:
I feel very much like eating one more piece of chocolate.
But.
I want to get a strong will power because I read a book with the title "On Desire" by Mr Irvine and I think that if I get a strong will then I will be able to achieve A, B, C and D and these four objectives are crucial to me because of some very idealistic considerations.

So: I make an effort of will and do not eat one more piece of chocolate.

Another example:
I feel like drinking one glass of beer. But I am an alcoholic and I want to quit in order to lead a booze-free life because ... of some idealistic considerations.
So I choose not to drink the beer.

why you call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire, why not calling it just "strong will power" or will?
why you call yourself free if one book or "some idealistic considerations" made you do something?

Mark Question wrote:

duszek wrote:I propose to call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire.

Example:
I feel very much like eating one more piece of chocolate.
But.
I want to get a strong will power because I read a book with the title "On Desire" by Mr Irvine and I think that if I get a strong will then I will be able to achieve A, B, C and D and these four objectives are crucial to me because of some very idealistic considerations.

So: I make an effort of will and do not eat one more piece of chocolate.

Another example:
I feel like drinking one glass of beer. But I am an alcoholic and I want to quit in order to lead a booze-free life because ... of some idealistic considerations.
So I choose not to drink the beer.

why you call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire, why not calling it just "strong will power" or will?
why you call yourself free if one book or "some idealistic considerations" made you do something?

Idealistic considerations do not make me do something, Mark. They have no agency and no will.
It is me, a free agent, who decides to do A and not B because it considers reasons for A and B, respectively, and decides that A is better.

A book says something. I observe the world around me. I remember my experiences. I listen to my intuition. And I decided whether the book is right or wrong on a particular issue.
A book is just a written statement of some mind. It can be a collective mind too, like the collective wisdom of an ancient Jewish tribe, expressed metaphorically in pictures and tales.

rantal wrote:This discussion is really a confusion between 'cause' and 'reason' Imagine a person fasting and in hunger, their hunger gives them

a reason to eat but does not cause them to eat

their wish to fast

gives them reason to refrain from eating but does not cause them so to do

Neither of these reasons is sufficient to cause the person to act without the person choosing to act upon that reason

all the best, rantal

confusion between physical and rational (be)cause?

is persons wish free of physical and rational causes? why the person choose to act upon that reason?

duszek wrote:

Mark Question wrote:

duszek wrote:I propose to call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire.

Example:
I feel very much like eating one more piece of chocolate.
But.
I want to get a strong will power because I read a book with the title "On Desire" by Mr Irvine and I think that if I get a strong will then I will be able to achieve A, B, C and D and these four objectives are crucial to me because of some very idealistic considerations.

So: I make an effort of will and do not eat one more piece of chocolate.

Another example:
I feel like drinking one glass of beer. But I am an alcoholic and I want to quit in order to lead a booze-free life because ... of some idealistic considerations.
So I choose not to drink the beer.

why you call free a choice which implies the overcoming of a very strong carnal desire, why not calling it just "strong will power" or will?
why you call yourself free if one book or "some idealistic considerations" made you do something?

Idealistic considerations do not make me do something, Mark. They have no agency and no will.
It is me, a free agent, who decides to do A and not B because it considers reasons for A and B, respectively, and decides that A is better.

A book says something. I observe the world around me. I remember my experiences. I listen to my intuition. And I decided whether the book is right or wrong on a particular issue.
A book is just a written statement of some mind. It can be a collective mind too, like the collective wisdom of an ancient Jewish tribe, expressed metaphorically in pictures and tales.

why call agent a free agent if some idealistic considerations are reason to agents will not to drink a beer?
where is the freedom if agents will wants something because of some book and because some very idealistic considerations, reasons, observations and experiences from the world around agent tells him to do something?

Mark.

An idealistic consideration does not tell anyone anything.
An idealistic consideration is generated in a free agent´s mind.
A free agent is the author of it. It is his.

Of course, some people do not bother to generate their own considerations. They adopt other people´s considerations. But they do not have to. They can generate their own ones if they want to.