Why isn't it both?

Did you read my example of the pinball on the 3rd page?

Third page of what?

I still don't understand what you think the appearance of free will is the appearance of. What is actually happening behind the curtain? Here I am, choosing vanilla over 10 other flavors of ice-cream. No one is forcing vanilla on me. It appeared to me that I chose vanilla of my own free will. You say it was only an appearance. What was actually going on, then. That's a plain question? I don't think it had a thing to do with souls or first causes, and I know nobody who does. I was making a decision. Fine. Was I acting freely or not?

Oh woops 4th page and this is what I said:



I think I can explain it to you. Think of a pinball machine. In brightnoon's opinion we are like that. We are a ball in a pinball machine, an ever so complicated machine. The ball has absolutely no control over where it goes. It's path is 'chosen' by every things that it bumps/careens off of. In life brightnoon says that we 'make our future decisions' based off of what happened in the past. Like in the pinball example if the ball hits one bumper we can mathematically calculate that it only has one trajectory.

Bright noon is saying that there are 10 options but they really aren't possible choices. You have been influenced sometime in the past to like vanilla so that would be why you choose it. If this time you choose chocolate then you were influenced by something that made you desire to choose otherwise this time. Maybe this time you 'choose' to get neither that is only because you were influenced in the past to get none.

He is saying that every future 'choice', what ever it be that you 'choose' was going to be what you were going to choose no matter what because of something(s) in the past that made you 'come to that conclusion'.

He is saying that it is an illusion because we do not realize that it is because of these influences that we choose how we choose. Even now, if you were to go out and get ice cream you may think "well brightnoon assumes i'm going to choose vanilla so I'll choose cookie dough instead"
See in that very example you would have choosen cookie dough BECAUSE you were influenced into doing so. ANY choice you make can be viewed and the history behind it to show you why you chose what you chose.

When the ball in the pinball machine is rolling it does not have a mechanical arm that moves it from one bumper to another, it rolls their its self but only roles in the direction it was influenced to go. The ball may think that it is rolling along on its own free will to its next destination but it is wrong. We think like that brightnoon would say I would think




It all makes perfect sense to me what brightnoon is saying and again it is ONLY true if there is no soul. If you believe there is a soul then that is way different.

But what makes you think that either you or I are like pinballs in a pinball machine? If we were like that, then you would be right. But there is no reason to think that we are. We often can do as we please, and sometimes we change our minds. We are completely unlike pinballs (or puppets, another popular analogy). This has nothing to do with souls. It has to do with the clear fact that people like us make decisions and choices, and that we often are not compelled to do what we do. And when we can do as we please, we act freely.

Actually no. With out a soul you do not act freely.

Does a computer act freely when it is given a set of instructions of code? No, it follows the code it does not have a choice. While running through the code it may be given an option to calculate the best choice for the program but it is basing its calculations on the code it was originally given.

It has everything to do with a soul or intangible essence of a person. If a person is just merely molecules slapped together then the person's decisions will be an effect of how their body came to be where it was in that situation, what it has been through in that situation etc...

If you could ask the computer if it thought it was making free choices I'm sure it would think so. If you don't have a soul you only think you have free choices.

But since there is no evidence I know of that people have souls, and since people often act freely, then it follows that having a soul is not necessary for acting freely. (Note: there is little reason to think that people are computers).

Ok so in your view you do not have a soul.
Alrighty then we'll move from there.

When you make a decision to go to work in the morning how do you make that decision? Tell me how scientifically you make that decision.

I don't want to hear:
"Well I weigh the benefits of getting fired versus having a day off..."

Since there is no soul then your mind is not actually choosing one thing over another. Your brain's synapses are firing, data is flying around etc... Do you have control over your brains synapses? No they control you. What every they do, you do.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. I'm going to try and work with you to get you to see this. But it all comes down to whether or not you have a soul. If you don't, kiss free will good bye.

But please do answer how you 'make a decision' and we can go from there.

I don't want to hear:
"Well I weigh the benefits of getting fired versus having a day off..."

What would you like to hear, then?

click here,

What makes you conclude that you have free will even if you have a soul? What does the soul have to do with it?

You would state that you weigh the benefits. How scientifically do you weigh the benefits. What physical stuff is moving around in your brain?

I am not a brain physiologist. But what difference does it make? Of course all kinds of things are happening in my body (not only my brain) when I make decisions and choices. Lots of things happen also when I am digesting my food. But digesting my food occurs without my cooperation; but choosing and deciding needs my cooperation. There is still a difference between something non-voluntary like digesting, and something voluntary like deciding although bodily happenings are necessary for both. I can digest while asleep, but I cannot decide or choose while asleep.

Ok not a brain physiologist. Well would you agree that something is going on in your brain when you make a decision i.e. stuff moving around etc...?
Would you also agree that everything that makes up a person has a physical nature to it? Which means you can examine every part of the body and what makes a person under a microscope.

If you agree to both of those then you have absolutely no choice in any decision that you make. I know that because EVERY action that goes on in your body and EVERYTHING that has ever influenced you can be theoretically viewed and documented. Since EVERYTHING can be viewed and documented then you could put ALL of it into one massive math equation and calculate any future action.

As to your example THAT is the illusion. You think that you have control over what you decide upon but you don't. You have no soul so every part of your body has been effected by something in the past and will now act on that. When you lift your arm up to brush your teeth even though you 'tell' yourself or 'think' to do it your not actually deciding upon it. Your brain has logged in the past that 'cleaning you teeth = 'good" and it has also logged that 'you must lift your arm to your mouth to brush'.

You must come to grasp with this.
Either believe that you have a soul and have free will.
Or believe that you have no soul and no free will.

But you can't have your cake and eat it. They don't go hand in hand its one or the other. It takes a bit of 'deep thinking' to get.
So the question is 'do I have a soul' or 'do I not have a soul.'

It is not 'do I or do I not have free will.'

Determine whether or not you have a soul and then you will 'know' whether or not you 'have' 'free will'.



I'm done here. But I'm going to be making a large post related to this. Now that I've heard others thoughts I'm going to sort of make a sequel to what I said.

Well, when I chose vanilla ice-cream the other day, I am pretty sure I was not forced to make that choice. So, I conclude I chose it of my own free will. Why do you think I was forced to choose vanilla ice-cream? You weren't there, were you?

I have a question.

Property 1: The ability to choose.
Property 2: Free will.

What is the difference, subjectively?