hnng

So to investigate whether anyone has free will, we must first be clear what
we’re talking about and looking for, the conceptual nature of freedom
and free will. Philosophers have put forward various accounts of what
constitutes some conditions of human freedom: lack of constraints, open -
future choice, reasons - responsiveness, capability of being held responsible,
and so on.

However, following J. L. Austin and some others, let’s generalize
from these more focused suggestions and say that freedom in general
always requires two interrelated components of ability and opportunity (or
opportunities—more about this in a moment).

The idea here is roughly that one can be free if and only if one is able to be free in some relevant
way, such as being able to think, speak, move, and so on, and one has a
course of thought or action open to the exercise of such abilities, so one
isn’t unduly distracted, one’s lips aren’t duct - taped, one isn’t superglued to
the floor, and so on.

Note that freedom in general then is a state of affairs
where one has some sort of internal capacity or power, and one has as well
an external situation so that that capacity or power can complete its function.
Only when both these internal and external conditions obtain can
one be said to be truly free to think, to speak, to move.

Applying this picture of freedom to the specific issue of free will requires
a bit of explanation. To begin, philosophers are for the most part
divided into two mutually exclusive camps that are at odds on the question
of how human brains and/or conscious minds function.

The question here is whether the basis of consciousness is only an immensely complex system
of causes and effects, such as a purely biological account of thought might
provide, or whether consciousness might include deviation from the strict
rule of cause and effect, for example by appeal to quantum physics or supernaturalism.

no

@stag so you understand that after Jesus completed their goal and became our saviour the laws of the old testament were no more

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-christ-fulfilled-and-ended-the-old-testament-regime

I am on the snail spectrum

Respect me

These two views are respectively termed determinism and
indeterminism. To begin to understand the relevance of these views to the
question of the freedom of minds, note that one main difference between
them is that by determinism the future of such a mind’s function is locally
(in the next moment) “closed,” and by indeterminism the future of
a mind is locally “open.”

to who wanted to fuck a reptile

well

yiff

That is, by determinism a given state of mind at
one present moment causes one, and only one, state of mind in the next
future moment as an effect. All other conceivably different future states of
mind relative to the present one are “closed” off by the present causal one.
By contrast, the indeterminism of a given present state of mind that is not
causal is “open” to at least two alternative local future states of mind.

Satanacism

Thats satanacism

zeph

you christian

One can see that these two views have one immediate tie - in to opinions about
the freedom of such minds. If our minds’ futures are always closed by determinism,
then those futures based on our “choices” only go one particular
way and no other. By indeterminism, on the other hand, our futures are at
least sometimes open to this future and that future, as the 1980s Modern
English song Melt with You goes, “the future’s open wide!” So it may seem
that determinism robs us of a free will to choose between distinct futures
and indeterminism restores it.

Unfortunately, things are more complicated than that in part because,
depending on what exactly “freedom” means, each of the determinist or
indeterminist views of minds can lay claim to free will, and one can be
made to exclude it as well. It all depends on what free will ability is supposed
to be, and what opportunity or opportunities are additionally needed,
and what determinism and indeterminism can provide in terms of these
components of freedom

rick and morty ^

Say, for example, that a determinist interprets an ability to make a free
choice as weighing options and coming up with the best one. Sophisticated
computers can do this, and they are essentially causal mechanisms (their
functional states are such that their futures are always locally closed). So a
determinist view of mind can accommodate such an account of ability and
thus regard our minds to be a form of mechanistic supercomputer.

head too small

LOL