Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by dastardly stem »

I don't know that it's healthy of us to seek revenge, retribution, imprisonment, or otherwise suffering for those who sin.

If we take any particular one of us and determine the events of our lives, if ever we could really dig that deep, that led us to do our sin, it's a wonder to think we could have done otherwise. And yet we seem determined to treat each other as if any one of us could have done other than what we end up doing. This notion that we could have done otherwise seems to be an incredibly certain one, but I doubt its true at all. I doubt we could ever have done other than what we do. We only assume we could have. That feeling, that illusion of we could have done otherwise, may be enough to help us in our lives going forward, I suppose, but as I see it that retrospect is simply part of the data that gets input into our brains which in the future may see us approaching a similar situation and choosing differently then what we did previously. Our illusion of freely choosing is perhaps vital to our move forward in life, but I'd wager it is truly an illusion.

I don't know, maybe this is mumbo-jumbo-ey stuff. But I can't help to think we need this mindset to move us forward in our society--this notion that free will is but an illusion to us. I like a particular thought exercise because I'm so geographically minded. If you are instructed to pick a city, any city, in the world. What starts happening in your mind as you decide on one? If you could settle down your thoughts and all that firing activity in your brain as you go through the process of deciding one, could you possibly know all that goes into that decision? I could certainly be saying to myself something like, well, Kiev popped into my head, but I've never been there and Adelaide just posted itself front and center in my psyche...but I too have never been there. Oh, remember when I read about Igram in Jakarta...and my mom lived in Atlanta.... and that weekend in Portland...I mean maybe our mind is doing something like that and yet it's these places that are just popping into our head as we're contemplating cities. What's making them pop other than all the data put into us in various ways throughout our lives? Someone's not choosing Ulaanbaatar because it never pops into this one's head, for instance. But that one might be quite aware of it, perhaps lived there for a time. It just so happens at the very moment that the question was posed, that person's brain was going in one direction already. And many cities well known to that person simply melted away from his/her memory during the moments of contemplation and, for whatever reason, cities prominent to that person just didn't happen to show up. But if the same is asked another day, it may be that a whole new host of candidates emerge for consideration. All because that other day provides different context, perhaps.

I think it's a good exercise because we can't fully trace what's going into our decision. We only think we can. Ultimately when we do decide on one, say given 2 minutes to think about it then you have to say it out loud, its nothing more than the result of millions of tiny things snapping into place culminating into that moment. We might 10 seconds later think 'well, I could have just as easily picked Boston, but I didn't", which I suppose is kind of true, but as the seconds melted away and the moment of saying one came, you simply said exactly what you were destined to say. Replayed a million times over, with every parameter being equal and you'd say the same city each time, without fail. Why? Because every thought we have every transpired activity in our brain are set, determined by the input given us throughout our lives. Our decisions are limited to the activity in our brains.

Further, as it pertains to religion. Religion has it that we are free to choose and that our choice either condemns or exonerates in the end. But it assumes our mind our thoughts are controlled by an unseen power hidden in each of us--a soul or spirit. Says Yuval Noah Harrari
Scientists studying the inner workings of the human organism have found no soul there. They increasingly argue that human behavior is determined by hormones, genes and synapses, rather than by free will--the same forces the determine the behavior of chimpanzees, wolves, and ants. Our judicial and political systems largely try to sweep such inconvenient discoveries under the carpet. But in all frankness, how long can we maintain the wall separating the department of biology from the departments of law and political science?
Religion often, well the western ones, tell us there is an end and it ain't pretty to most of us because our spirits are too rebellious and cause us to sin. But it appears that is not so at all. We sin based not only on our mind activity but based on those plus our biology--our hormones and genes. Religion painting the false picture of reality seems to be a huge part of our desire to condemn, feel satisfaction knowing other gets their just desserts, and seek revenge. If a psychotic person is driven to kill another, and that other happens to be our loved one its probably hard not to feel hate for the killer. But if we could understand what made him, caused him to helplessly do that which he did, then perhaps we'd feel less desire to blame and feel more mercy. If there's a god watching all of this and feeling justified in telling many he never knew them, hoping to send them to hell or the worst possible imaginable place of suffering for eternity...well, he's a weenie to put it kindly, and certainly not worth worshipping anyway.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by huckelberry »

dastardly stem wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 5:22 pm
I don't know that it's healthy of us to seek revenge, retribution, imprisonment, or otherwise suffering for those who sin.

If we take any particular one of us and determine the events of our lives, if ever we could really dig that deep, that led us to do our sin, it's a wonder to think we could have done otherwise. And yet we seem determined to treat each other as if any one of us could have done other than what we end up doing. This notion that we could have done otherwise seems to be an incredibly certain one, but I doubt its true at all. .........
I think it's a good exercise because we can't fully trace what's going into our decision. We only think we can.
..........

Further, as it pertains to religion. Religion has it that we are free to choose and that our choice either condemns or exonerates in the end. But it assumes our mind our thoughts are controlled by an unseen power hidden in each of us--a soul or spirit. Says Yuval Noah Harrari
Scientists studying the inner workings of the human organism have found no soul there. They increasingly argue that human behavior is determined by hormones, genes and synapses, rather than by free will--the same forces the determine the behavior of chimpanzees, wolves, and ants. Our judicial and political systems largely try to sweep such inconvenient discoveries under the carpet. But in all frankness, how long can we maintain the wall separating the department of biology from the departments of law and political science?
Religion often, well the western ones, tell us there is an end and it ain't pretty to most of us because our spirits are too rebellious and cause us to sin. But it appears that is not so at all. We sin based not only on our mind activity but based on those plus our biology--our hormones and genes. Religion painting the false picture of reality seems to be a huge part of our desire to condemn, feel satisfaction knowing other gets their just desserts, and seek revenge. If a psychotic person is driven to kill another, and that other happens to be our loved one its probably hard not to feel hate for the killer. But if we could understand what made him, caused him to helplessly do that which he did, then perhaps we'd feel less desire to blame and feel more mercy. If there's a god watching all of this and feeling justified in telling many he never knew them, hoping to send them to hell or the worst possible imaginable place of suffering for eternity...well, he's a weenie to put it kindly, and certainly not worth worshipping anyway.
Stem,
I wonder if you are aware that over the past 2000 years the view that people do not have freewill and for the sort of reasons you present has been the majority view in Christian understanding. Examples like Luthers" Bondage of the Will" or Johnathan Edwards "On Free Will" agree with and expand on the arguments against free will which you present. It has been a majority view but not the only possible view. I think it should be noted that whether people believed a free will exists or not they have agreed that society needs to make some laws about acceptable human actions and some sort of sanction against destructive and harmful behavior. A persons awareness of sanctions becomes part of the mental machinery creating a decision. Instruction in better values and how some actions result in better results than others also becomes part of the machinery causing decisions to be made by human organisms.

I think that better understanding of the relationship of choice of actions and results is necessary for all people to live whether there is a nonmaterial soul or not. Better understands helps to determine better choices. Freewill is irrelavant, might just confuse the proper decision making process that all mammals make.

I agree with you that the picture of a God hoping to get hell properly filled is a picture jof god unworthy of the title.
mentalgymnast
1st Counselor
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:29 pm

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by mentalgymnast »

dastardly stem wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 5:22 pm
I can't help to think we need this mindset to move us forward in our society--this notion that free will is but an illusion to us.
I wonder if Victor Frankl would agree. He makes the argument that all humans do have free will, it just takes a certain kind of person to exercise it, and make the choices that others around them do not. He found that purpose is what drives people. He found that there was a strong relationship between “meaninglessness” and criminal behaviors, addictions and depression.

https://www.studymode.com/essays/Viktor ... 90802.html
https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/hi ... or-frankl/

So at least at the level where we choose purpose over meaninglessness we have free will. It’s not an illusion.

At least in the concentration camps it wasn’t.

Free will as an illusion, I think, is a dangerous position to take. But if you take accountability out of the picture and make some other tweaks, I can see why you might flirt with this idea.

Regards,
MG
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by Moksha »

Ideal Christianity stresses love, mercy, and forgiveness. There are so many stresses that draw us away from that and into anger, which is the most powerful of our natural responses. As you know, there are variants of ideal Christianity that stress obedience, tithing, real estate transactions, and mutual funds.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by dastardly stem »

huckelberry wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:15 pm


Stem,
I wonder if you are aware that over the past 2000 years the view that people do not have freewill and for the sort of reasons you present has been the majority view in Christian understanding. Examples like Luthers" Bondage of the Will" or Johnathan Edwards "On Free Will" agree with and expand on the arguments against free will which you present.
As far as I'm aware their arguments would be more along the lines of humans are weak, foolish, and carnal by nature and can't really will to do good, follow God or accept his salvation without his help. That is a far cry for which I'm arguing. It may be seen as the exact opposite.
It has been a majority view but not the only possible view.
I don't think it's been the majority view. but I grant it's there, but it does not square with the reasoning I laid out, as I see it.
I think it should be noted that whether people believed a free will exists or not they have agreed that society needs to make some laws about acceptable human actions and some sort of sanction against destructive and harmful behavior. A persons awareness of sanctions becomes part of the mental machinery creating a decision. Instruction in better values and how some actions result in better results than others also becomes part of the machinery causing decisions to be made by human organisms.
I agree. For some reason it appears, so much so, that our accepted need to separate and sanction people who have displayed harmful behavior is also seemingly accepted as a good measure for which us to judge and condemn. My querying is a wonder if we can fully accept our need for a safe and healthy society, eschewing that which would disrupt it, and yet find in ourselves an understanding of where harmful behavior comes from so much so we eliminate another harmful behavior which is revenge, or some sort of delight in seeing others suffer for their sins.
I think that better understanding of the relationship of choice of actions and results is necessary for all people to live whether there is a nonmaterial soul or not. Better understands helps to determine better choices. Freewill is irrelavant, might just confuse the proper decision making process that all mammals make.

I agree with you that the picture of a God hoping to get hell properly filled is a picture jof god unworthy of the title.
I'm glad we agree and I enjoyed how you worded that.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by dastardly stem »

mentalgymnast wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:25 pm
dastardly stem wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 5:22 pm
I can't help to think we need this mindset to move us forward in our society--this notion that free will is but an illusion to us.
I wonder if Victor Frankl would agree. He makes the argument that all humans do have free will, it just takes a certain kind of person to exercise it, and make the choices that others around them do not. He found that purpose is what drives people. He found that there was a strong relationship between “meaninglessness” and criminal behaviors, addictions and depression.

https://www.studymode.com/essays/Viktor ... 90802.html
https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/hi ... or-frankl/

So at least at the level where we choose purpose over meaninglessness we have free will. It’s not an illusion.

At least in the concentration camps it wasn’t.

Free will as an illusion, I think, is a dangerous position to take. But if you take accountability out of the picture and make some other tweaks, I can see why you might flirt with this idea.

Regards,
MG
The issue we have here is humans are more complex than this. Of course feelings of meaninglessness can lead to criminal and harmful behavior. Religion seems to get a win here because it's so dominant. But we fail to acknowledge people find meaning outside of religion all the time. And, it may be that people feel meaninglessness because others are telling them without religion there is no meaning. You seem to suggest this all shows fee will plays a factor. But your view doesn't account for much in terms of humanity. What drives someone to addiction? Well, of course it's different for everyone. The problem is if a meth addict, we'll say, has a chance to relive his life, with every single parameter the same, he'd get addicted to meth every time. Every environmental factor from his birth remains given him without choice. If his mom is addicted to meth, and he eventually gets addicted, well, he didn't choose his mom, nor her situation. He also did not choose his genes and hormones. He didn't choose his brain and how it's wired. Its all put upon him. And from his birth on, his brain is fed data from the environment around him. You may think he has a choice freely to choose whatever he wants. But he's limited to the options given him whenever faced with a decision. And each time he's deciding something it's a factor of what he is. If his brain settles on something, the options and reasons presented are those which he's been fed. They aren't more than that because you have a feeling that anyone can choose whatever they want. No, we're all just limited to what's been given us.

Extend this thinking to the rest of us and its easy to see free will is an illusion.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
IHAQ
God
Posts: 1533
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by IHAQ »

dastardly stem wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:01 pm
Extend this thinking to the rest of us and its easy to see free will is an illusion.
Which it is, assuming we define Free Will as "the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded." (Wikipedia)
I'm unaware of anyone who has the ability to choose a course of action which would be unimpeded in any way.
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by Physics Guy »

The question of free will is often framed counterfactually: could I have had oatmeal instead of toast for breakfast? If I had wanted to have oatmeal then presumably I could have, but could I in fact have wanted oatmeal, or was I unavoidably foreordained to want toast this morning?

But see, I'm not sure that I'm really any less free if I was predestined to want toast. As long as I really did want toast, then no matter why I wanted toast or whether I could have wanted anything else, I got what I wanted. Isn't that freedom?
I was a teenager before it was cool.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by dastardly stem »

Physics Guy wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:46 pm
The question of free will is often framed counterfactually: could I have had oatmeal instead of toast for breakfast? If I had wanted to have oatmeal then presumably I could have, but could I in fact have wanted oatmeal, or was I unavoidably foreordained to want toast this morning?

But see, I'm not sure that I'm really any less free if I was predestined to want toast. As long as I really did want toast, then no matter why I wanted toast or whether I could have wanted anything else, then I got what I wanted. Isn't that freedom?
It sure feels that way. Talking about food is a good example. If you want a hamburger and fries you are sure free to go get one. But what if that want gets confused in time, as perhaps, your doctor cautioned on your last visit that you must cut out fried food and red meat and suggests you replace it with greens like spinach and broccoli? Such added information may impact your wants. And, as it turns out when it comes to our lives our wants are in control, or we are forced to do something we don't necessarily want which seems to fly in the face of free will too.

We can't choose to want to eat old stinky garbage out of the garbage can. The only reason why we'd want to do that is to prove a point--"see? I can eat out of the garbage can if I want." But our wants are really just determined--impeding our wills. If we want a hamburger and fries its because we crave what we've enjoyed previously. Thus, its that which is getting fed into our brains that is causing our wants. I could go to a restaurant and want to try something different or new. But that want, again, is just a result of everything that led us to that point, determined by the circumstance of our lives. We want that because we've had a good experience doing so before, or it sounds cool to someone at work the next day that you went to the fancy restaurant and got something really exotic sounding, or whatever. It seems to me, we're tossed to and fro by our wants. And our wants are simply determined by those factors Harrari summarizes--our genes, hormones, and synapses. We simply don't have control over those. Our physical bodies are given to us, including our brains and how it functions. Our genes and how they behave (epigenetics) are chosen for us. Our time and place of our existence, again determined for us--and that is precisely what builds our minds which is a direct factor in what we decide, or what we want.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Our condeming nature, or is it religion that's brought it out of us?

Post by Physics Guy »

I don’t think our synapses and instincts are controlling us: they are us. When they get what they want, that is us being free.

Or?
I was a teenager before it was cool.
Post Reply