Even if I've read some of them

> I don't think so
@Eoppa That's *confirmation bias* <:smug:591181720565579807>

~~all Christians should read Nietzsche~~

<:wew:591452132721426484>

Well Molina formulated the idea that all of our choices are free but God puts us in situations that he knows we will make certain choices to complete God's plan.

I say I don't think so because I understand my idea better than I can communicate it

So we have free will but we are in a rat maze and it's certain that we'll follow the cheese?

That's what he said

<:oh:603773792673595405>

And I maintain the intellect is immaterial, but is strongly influenced by the material, but the free will and intellect is incorporeal

Cool explanation, it has the advantage of explaining free will and the "disadvantage" of keeping the deathly dread of determinism

I've always held explanations that say the free will can come from determined particles and laws as too big of a concession where it just devolves past compatiblism into determinism again.

I still think my original explanation is extremely cool

I think that's Locke's explanation. I'm not a fan of Locke. It's interesting and certainly adds to the debate, but ultimately I think it collapses under pressure.

*what pressure*

The pressure of actually conforming to any real definition of free will

That's what that argument has the biggest trouble doing

What's your definition?

That our will in some respect is uncaused

Assuming free will exists is the most coherent option we have.

That way we can kick the shit out of people who act like assholes instead of being forced to leave them alone because they didn’t “chose” to do it.

Philosophically we still ought to justify/explain it.

By face value it's easiest to assume we have it

In the same way that in our every day life we act as if the earth is flat, but everything is more complicated as we go up in complexity.

Is it acceptable for your definition that the source of the free will is not caused, but is the cause? Because my definition of what a subject is is basically the sum total of causes that ultimately cause action to be taken

If Free Will is say, the cause, then God still is the First Cause because He Himself made the Concept of Free Will

That's what Eoppa said referring to Molinism I think

Molinism?

Molinism is something a bit different

Imma Google that

And I say God at every moment sustains our free will

ughh

I am ragequitting this conversation

Free will and the modal collapse argument are two things I think I can contribute to if I write something longer and more fleshed out. If not free will then hopefully the modal collapse argument.

@Revolt Against Everything there's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya about the raising of the wrist, Socrates himself was permanently pissed...

<:GWjojoGachiWoke:399972426332504085>

Yes

No

Well. Maybe. "It's complicated".

<@&682288520680964151> Daily Topic 🔖

- Where would you draw the line between insanity and creativity?

When are hurt or in close danger of being hurt as the result of the persons creativity/insanity