Fated and free...I've heard described before as God has before Him the entire, completed painting, while all we see are single brush strokes.
Dr. Peter Kreeft uses the Lord of the Rings series...the author knows the whole story and has written it, when we look at the characters in the story, they are freely making choices, but they are also fated by the author's pen. His lecture on this is here:
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
The whole free will thing is interesting. Not every human is even capable of making choices. Of those who are there are always limits to the choices we are able to make.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
just me wrote:The whole free will thing is interesting. Not every human is even capable of making choices. Of those who are there are always limits to the choices we are able to make.
I agree.
There are also differences in how free will is viewed. As I understand it, Mormons view free will as having as many choices as possible. While, Catholics view free will as a gift by God in order that we may follow Him freely. Choices made to the contrary, are an abuse of the gift God has given us.
Peace.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
bcspace wrote: The choices one makes can mold preference.
I addressed this already. If you choose to mold your preferences it is because a set of preferences already exist, and eventually we get back to external factors that shaped our ability to make decisions
You are not a base instinct type of animal. You can keep your base desires in check. If not, you'd probably have comitted murder by now. This is evidence that you have free will and are in complete control of it.
This makes no sense. I never said mankind is a base instinct animal, whatever that is. What I said is that humans make choices because of preferences, and that preferences are caused by external factors. The fact we prefer to hold our desire to murder in check has nothing to do with anything.
I'm sorry, but all questions muse be submitted in writing.
Free will is an illusion. It is impossible for anyone to be conscious of the processes that result in emotion and feeling. It is these processes that determine our behavior.
There are a great many variables that result in an action or a thought. Something (a soul, I presume) is supposed to allow humans to have a will that is, to a certain degree, free from influence... be it genetic, environmental or otherwise.
I think the problem with people who argue for the existence of free will is that no one in history has described how any action could be free of cause and effect.
To me, it certainly feels like I have free will. For most people, separating how they feel from reality when it defies their intuition is impossible.
Yes, there is a certain structure to humans that cannot be overcome...it is *something* rather than nothing...an undeniable reality.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
malaise wrote:Premise 1: Free will is the ability to make choices that are not dependent on external factors in that those factors did not cause you to make a choice
Premise 2: When making a choice one is choosing the option(s) one more prefers. I want to keep typing this response to you, so I do.
Premise 3: All choices are thus dependent on preferences (from 2)
Premise 4: All preferences are imposed on us by external factor
I dispute Premise 1. This is not how I define free will.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote:I dispute Premise 1. This is not how I define free will.
Define free will then. Something akin to my definition is needed for the term to retain its meaning. If we are all cogs in a long chain of events it is quite silly to say that ours will are free n'est pas?
I'm sorry, but all questions muse be submitted in writing.