It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Originally posted by WEOPPOSEDECEPTION
I agree that free will is an illusion. A very persistent one however. Try choosing what your next 10 thoughts will be.
If you ponder this deep enough, you might question what exactly the "self" is. It's like a camera that takes credit/ownership for what it sees.
Very true. Also, some will say, "Well, you can choose to be good or bad."Yeah, but we are predispostioned towards one or the other. If not through upbringing, experience. So, again, how is that "free wil."
[edit on 11-8-2008 by SpeakerofTruth]
Originally posted by sarcastic
I dont believe things are determined by circumstance, only by consequence.
What goes around comes around.
And when justice isnt whats working what comes next is trouble.
sarc
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Originally posted by _Heretic
I am sure we could find harmony with cause and effect and use it to our advantage instead of being its slave
Well, I mean, in order for that to happen we simply hav to understand cause and effect.
If you run into a middle of a a busy highway and get struck by a vehicle the cause is you running into the oad and the effect is being struckby a vehicle. How do you avoid that? Don't run into the road.
I am sort of being facetious, but that is really what it boils down to.
Originally posted by Alexander_Supertramp
I don't mean to be a buzzkill, but I challenge your premise on the definition of free will. You say free will is the ability to choose, or will, something without regards to preceding events/causes. I disagree strongly. That is a definition of determinism....of course one thing will determine the next.
I will go so far as to give my own personal definition of free will, which you can then argue against. I say free will is the ability to perform an action, regardless of limiting factors which are indeed out of our control, which isn't externally forced upon you.
Originally posted by Alexander_Supertramp
I will go so far as to give my own personal definition of free will, which you can then argue against. I say free will is the ability to perform an action, regardless of limiting factors which are indeed out of our control, which isn't externally forced upon you.
Originally posted by Migxp
So you can beat me up for speaking about GOD, I don't care.
I know that GOD wants you to know HIM.
I know that one day you will see, right now what you can't see is because you don't ask. You have not, because you ask not.
GOD gave us free will, even evil has free will.
Free will is not a lie.
Since the beginning of the 20th century, quantum mechanics has revealed previously concealed aspects of events. Newtonian physics, taken in isolation rather than as an approximation to quantum mechanics, depicts a universe in which objects move in perfectly determinative ways. At human scale levels of interaction, Newtonian mechanics gives predictions that in many areas check out as completely perfectible, to the accuracy of measurement. Poorly designed and fabricated guns and ammunition scatter their shots rather widely around the center of a target, and better guns produce tighter patterns. Absolute knowledge of the forces accelerating a bullet should produce absolutely reliable predictions of its path, or so was thought. However, knowledge is never absolute in practice and the equations of Newtonian mechanics can exhibit sensitive dependence on initial conditions, meaning small errors in knowledge of initial conditions can result in arbitrarily large deviations from predicted behavior. At atomic scales the paths of objects can only be predicted in a probabilistic way. The paths may not be exactly specified in a full quantum description of the particles; "path" is a classical concept which quantum particles do not exactly possess. The probability arises from the measurement of the perceived path of the particle. In some cases, a quantum particle may trace an exact path, and the probability of finding the particles in that path is one. The quantum development is at least as predictable as the classical motion, but it describes wave functions that cannot be easily expressed in ordinary language. In double-slit experiments, light is fired singly through a double-slit apparatus at a distant screen and does not arrive at a single point, nor do the photons arrive in a scattered pattern analogous to bullets fired by a fixed gun at a distant target. Instead, the light arrives in varying concentrations at widely separated points, and the distribution of its collisions can be calculated reliably. In that sense the behavior of light in this apparatus is deterministic, but there is no way to predict where in the resulting interference pattern an individual photon will make its contribution (see Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle).
Even before the laws of quantum mechanics were fully developed, the phenomenon of radioactivity posed a challenge to determinism. A gram of uranium-238, a commonly occurring radioactive substance, contains some 2.5 x 1021 atoms. By all tests known to science these atoms are identical and indistinguishable. Yet about 12600 times a second one of the atoms in that gram will decay, giving off an alpha particle. This decay does not depend on external stimulus and no extant theory of physics predicts when any given atom will decay, with realistically obtainable knowledge.
In the seven seconds before Haynes' test subjects chose to push a button, activity shifted in their frontopolar cortex, a brain region associated with high-level planning. Soon afterwards, activity moved to the parietal cortex, a region of sensory integration. Haynes' team monitored these shifting neural patterns using a functional MRI machine.
Taken together, the patterns consistently predicted whether test subjects eventually pushed a button with their left or right hand -- a choice that, to them, felt like the outcome of conscious deliberation.
The decision studied -- whether to hit a button with one's left or right hand -- may not be representative of complicated choices that are more integrally tied to our sense of self-direction.
Also, the predictions were not completely accurate. Maybe free will enters at the last moment, allowing a person to override an unpalatable subconscious decision.
Honestly, being someone who believes in a Godhead, I have to say that we play the role we were individually meant to lay. Look at the universe, particularly our solar system. The planets rotate just as they should. Do they not? Are we to assume that this is just a cosmic accident or joke? I think not;I think not.