Free will and the responsibility of the state.

I saw thiswas attributed to Einstein the other day?

Einstein also wrote, "I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His nonexistence could excuse Him."

This lead me to ponder free will and the responsibility of the state.

I would argue from GPS to cellphone technology, we can monitor most people in the USA.

I would also argue we have the ability to control people through drugs. Something explored in the movie Equilibrium.

Equilibrium

In an oppressive future where all forms of feeling are illegal, a man in charge of enforcing the law rises to overthrow the system and state.

Equilibrium (2002) - IMDb

My argument would be this. No matter the reason we have free will. ( If you want to argue there is no free will. People willfully engaging in petty crimes, to impaired driving, to gang violence, to serial killers shows otherwise.) It is better to have free will and be allowed to choose are own will. And pay the price or consequences when we choose what some consider evil?

Or is it evil from creation and or to the state to allow free will when mind control and tracking could stop a majority of crimes?

a reply to: Lazy88

I think we have free will so that God has something to judge us based on. We have free will so he can see what we are gonna do. Are we really good people? Who knows unless we have free will to make our own choices.

I think mind control or something the government can do to prevent the use of free will and prevent crime sounds like a terrible idea because we could just actually use the death penalty and other more medieval forms of punishment and crime would probably go down quite a lot. The problem is recidivism and the solution is actual consequences. I mean, unless people are stupid, it would only take a couple of public livestreams of thieves getting a hand cut off to cut shoplifting probably like 80%. Harsher punishments that are actually enforced is what we need. Not government control.

originally posted by: Shoshanna
a reply to: Lazy88


I think mind control or something the government can do to prevent the use of free will and prevent crime sounds like a terrible idea

I was interested what people might post here. On another site, these are prevailing ideas. That god doesn’t exit. If god existed, god is evil because god allowed free where people could choose evil or good.

I think this life is sort of a spiritual boot camp myself.

And agree from god, creation, to state. Free will is essential.

Not many people are participating on the other sites various threads, or the one this is playing out. But I do find it ironic in proposing the state allows free will so it must be evil too. And in offering that the state can by all practical purposes can control free will, and therefore must be evil for not doing so. The argument is being ignored. And the argument was trying to be change.

Funny how that worked out.

Thank you for posting in the thread.

Matching-up freewill, and the state : seems a bit funny .

Everybody funny.

I probably didn't understand the OP well.

What does our freewill : have to do with the state, and vicey-versy ?

Need we define freewill, and ponder the role of the state ?

a reply to: Lazy88

i like to post sometimes when i read threads about free will.

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson, Neil Peart

being that i believe that God is Omnipotent and knows each and every road or path one may take, and your heart, some will go down the narrow road, some the wide. some will alter their journey to take the narrow and some the wide, but through it all both are needed to make the trip along the way challenging, and only the chosen will which he already knew will be allowed to enter the kingdom. it's the test along the way that matters, that's why he gave us free will. or as has it already been said reasons for the judgements that are to come.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
Matching-up freewill, and the state : seems a bit funny .

Everybody funny.

I probably didn't understand the OP well.

What does our freewill : have to do with the state, and vicey-versy ?

Need we define freewill, and ponder the role of the state ?

So. Goes like this. People post god is evil because god gave free will, then there is consequences if your will decides on evil ways.

But the same people believe god doesn’t exist.

Then the same people get ticked if you ask things like.

God is evil because god allows women and children to die. What does that make the USA for dropping atomic bombs on cities in WW II killing women and children?

If allowing people free will is evil by god. Then if the state having the ability to track people and control people with drugs is also committing evil for allowing free will?

I guess you can make the argument the state didn’t create people. But the same people don’t believe in god, so it’s a moot point. But begs the question with their logic, should the state be creating a new race of people through cloning that don’t have free will if allowing free will and holding people to the consequences of their actions is evil.

Added. But not my logic. I’m more in the camp everyone has a good dog and an evil dog inside. Life is a test if you will nurture the good dog and starve the evil dog. Or starve the good dog and nurture the evil dog. Or just straight replace dog with spirit.

It's always a choice. Do, don't do.

The state can try to impose whatever it wants and can reap the unforeseen consequences.

History is littered with state interventions gone wrong.

Because no matter what, people will do as they please for that is our nature.

The bit about current discourse on the existence or non existence of God will have lots of people who want to get away with doing evil. Evil does exist. It always involves choosing to harm others. The state often makes this choice because the state is just a bunch of individuals who want power and do not fully value non-state actors.

In the 21st century, the state is being gobbled up by immensely rich non-state actors who have the means to demand the state recognise their worth. Many of them will, until the end of never, deny how evil they are. Even as they use their wealth and influence to convince the state they alone can end the right of the individual to do or not do.