There is no such thing as 'Free Will'

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by greymare

I disagree with your statement, rodger.
I have, as many do, chosen to do things we would much prefer not to. I have felt that in different situations, things go either right or wrong, but often situations are not my first preference.
Is this what you mean, or am I missing something?
(I seem to be saying that alot lately. lol)

What you are missing is the fact that what you actually choose (whether you have given it due consideration or not) is in fact your "preferrance."
If it were not your preferrance you would not have finally chosen it.
The strongest sets of influences on your mind (not your "free will") determines what you actually choose.

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Chanting the same thing over and over again does not make it true. Show me some empirical evidence to back this up, please.

It's "emperical evidence" is self-contained because it's logic is absolutely impossible to refute.

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

[greymare]

define preference

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

It's "emperical evidence" is self-contained because it's logic is absolutely impossible to refute.

Empirical - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: em·pir·i·cal Pronunciation: \-i-kəl\ Variant(s): also em·pir·ic \-ik\ Function: adjective Date: 1569

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>
2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory>
3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment <empirical laws>
4 : of or relating to empiricism

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."

It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

That is your theory. Do you have any actual, practical observations to back this up? (Other than the assertations that merely exist in your mind? Is there any proof of its validity outside the realm of theory and speculation?)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; In practice, there is.
~Chuck Reid

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by greymare

define preference

There you go. Now you have it!

That in fact is why the eventual salvation of all fallen creatures from everything from which they need to be saved (including their stubborn will) is guranteed.

Man Is A Free Moral Agent: Just What Do You Mean Man is A Free Moral Agent; The Sinner Must Decide; The Shepherd Seeks The Sheep; The Will Of Man; I Will Draw All Men Unto Me; By One Man

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Empirical - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: em·pir·i·cal Pronunciation: \-i-kəl\ Variant(s): also em·pir·ic \-ik\ Function: adjective Date: 1569

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>
2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory>
3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment <empirical laws>
4 : of or relating to empiricism

That is your theory. Do you have any actual, practical observations to back this up? (Other than the assertations that merely exist in your mind? Is there any proof of its validity outside the realm of theory and speculation?)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; In practice, there is.
~Chuck Reid

It's not a theory. It's a stubborn fact, the logic of which cannot be refuted as it just sits there in all of the power of it's self-evidence.

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

It's "emperical evidence" is self-contained because it's logic is absolutely impossible to refute.

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

I tell you what, I will keep my eyes open and see if I can observe some actual behavior that will refute this assertation of yours. I'm confident that it won't be too long before I can provide an actual eye witness account that will demonstrate how disconnected from reality this is.

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

I tell you what, I will keep my eyes open and see if I can observe some actual behavior that will refute this assertation of yours. I'm confident that it won't be too long before I can provide an actual eye witness account that will demonstrate how disconnected from reality this is.

Go for it!
The strongest influence is causing you to do it.

Unless of course you decide not to do just to try to prove you have a "free will."

In that case your desire to try to prove you have a "free will" becomes the strongest influence in causing you to do it.
Still no "free will" involved.

We will always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest sets of influences that are being brought to bear upon our minds, because it is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer. The fact that we choose it demonstrates that we preferred it at least slightly more than other sets of influences that were almost just as strong.

Therefore there is no such a thing as “free will.”

[rodgertutt]

The strongest influence in my life right now is to go on my daily health walk of two miles with my wife to whom I have been happily married for 47 years. I'm 70 now.

Catch ya'll later

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

It's "emperical evidence" is self-contained because it's logic is absolutely impossible to refute.

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

Originally Posted by seattlegal

I tell you what, I will keep my eyes open and see if I can observe some actual behavior that will refute this assertation of yours. I'm confident that it won't be too long before I can provide an actual eye witness account that will demonstrate how disconnected from reality this is.

This really didn't take long.
Tell me, did this woman pour coffee on her pancakes because she preferred it to maple syrup?

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

It's not a theory. It's a stubborn fact, the logic of which cannot be refuted as it just sits there in all of the power of it's self-evidence.

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

I think the above video shows how your assertation is self-evidently false.

[rodgertutt]

The strongest influence that caused her to pour coffee on her pancakes was her erroneous assumption of thinking that the coffee was maple syrup. It was not even possible for her to not pour coffee on her pancakes because of her momentary temporary conviction that it was maple syrup. Momentarily she "preferred" to pour coffee on her pancakes because she thought it was maple syrup. She had no "free will" to choose any differently than she did.

Human error is frequently the strongest influence in explaining our choices.

[rodgertutt]

The coffee was not her "preferrence," but the choice (the act of choosing) was her preferrence because she thought it was maple syrup.

[nativeastral]

l am a self confessed addict, l cannot help but to prefer/choose/decide my addiction; l will now uplevel my addiction to a preference and by sheer will power will now prefer/decide/choose not to indulge in my addiction, at this present moment. [ken keyes]

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

It's "emperical evidence" is self-contained because it's logic is absolutely impossible to refute.

Since we always, without exception, choose in the direction of the strongest influence all of the time, there can be no such a thing as "free will."
It is absolutely impossible to choose what we do not prefer.
The fact that we choose it shows that we prefer it at least slightly more than other influences that are almost just as strong.

Originally Posted by rodgertutt

Human error is frequently the strongest influence in explaining our choices.

Yet, we are allowed our error...what is the origination of our errors?

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by nativeastral

l am a self confessed addict, l cannot help but to prefer/choose/decide my addiction; l will now uplevel my addiction to a preference and by sheer will power will now prefer/decide/choose not to indulge in my addiction, at this present moment. [ken keyes]

Whatever.
In any case the strongest influence will dictate what you choose.