The hypothesis: The will is free means; it is possible, under given circumstances, to act in this way or totally different. Which would simply mean that Newtons 3rd law doesnt have any effect in this certain case. The assumption interrupts the chain between an action and it its reaction.
Beyond this, the hypothesis said that there would be an existence without an essence. which means that it only is without to be. So, at the same time it is and is not.

What the heck are you on about, i get your first point and all but why is this at the Warlight forum of all places?

So Ranek, THIS is what you think about in your spare time?

the definition of free will you started with is probably the greatest of the erros in that small peace of crap you wrote there, try to get a brain


although i agree there is no such thing as free will

Hasklon, you could argue that every game is lost or won before it started.
Genghis, sometimes, among other things, like, due to this topic: is it usefull to punish a mistake or should they rather be corrected?

the definition of free will you started with is probably the greatest of the erros in that small peace of crap you wrote there, try to get a brain

I didnt made this definition. I just tried (not very well and with my broken enlish) to translate it from german. however, thanks for your reply ...

Ranek, the definition of free will that you are using doesn't take into consideration that regardless of what you do, there will be a reaction. Free will does not mean God-like power, nor does it mean you can trump someone else's free will.

I think we find it hard to believe in free will because we don't really understand what free will is and that if one person has it, so does most everyone else, which means we're constantly competing with other people's free will.

Some people think free will is having the ability to do anything you want at any time (i.e. God complex). This is incorrect, again because free will does not mean you have omnipotent authority over the system in which you live. It's better described a state of mind, as I've understood it.

Another thing we don't (or can't) fully comprehend is the impact our past self has on our present actions. We're bound by routine and experiences, which dictate how we see the world. This is where most would argue that free will does not in fact exist, but if that were the case then society would be stagnant and unable to change. Then again, some would argue that history shows that we haven't changed much over the last few thousand years and that society is stagnant.

I think the ability to recognize that we are influenced by routine and experience and the ability to understand that there are other possible outcomes by "bucking the trend" we show, to a degree, that we are capable of free thought and for that matter, free will.

Well, you can take what you want from that.

what exactly is the effect of free will in your opinion? To recognize and understand your possibilities doesnt prove,that there is the opportunity to choose a reaction, that hasnt been effected by a former action. It will still be determined.

I have a friend named Will and he is not incarcerated therefore there exists free Will.

do you even know what a law is? A law is a constant that holds under certain conditions. Thinking does not follow the conditions needed for the third law

Edited 3/4/2015 23:27:40

although if that isnt enough for you, heres another point. Assuming we live in the multiverse, where every universe possible exists, that means every time you make a decision, a new universe is created. Say you answer a question with yes or no, there will ALWAYS be a universe where you say yes and one where you say no. If you think of it like this, that means we both live in a deterministic universe that DOES have free will, because if there are infinite universes, any decision goes into one of them

I'm on team free will.

I like the idea of a multiverse, but not the many worlds version of it. As much as I'd like to imagine myself as the next Newton in some alternate universe, the whole many worlds hypothesis is a little much for me. I'm more of in the multiple unrelated non-interacting universes (philosophy masquerading as science) camp.

P.S. I think about this kind of stuff all the time, which is why I majored in Physics.

Edited 3/5/2015 01:51:39

I'm on team free will


Ps. I like physics But I'm not in that coplocated area

There is nothing random in the world, truly.

There is no free will, you just do what your brain is destined to tell you; you can not change the future without knowing the future (which the future accounts for...and so on).

Some of you will immediately know what I'm referring to.

Thinking does not follow the conditions needed for the third law

Im pretty sure it does. why do you belief, that thinking isnt connected to casuality?

although if that isnt enough for you, heres another point. Assuming we live in the multiverse, where every universe possible exists, that means every time you make a decision, a new universe is created. Say you answer a question with yes or no, there will ALWAYS be a universe where you say yes and one where you say no. If you think of it like this, that means we both live in a deterministic universe that DOES have free will, because if there are infinite universes, any decision goes into one of them

the whole theory bases on your fictional assumption. Is there any proof for a multiverse?

I'm more of in the multiple unrelated non-interacting universes (philosophy masquerading as science) camp.

could you possibly elaborate your statement?

Some of you will immediately know what I'm referring to.

Unfortunately, I dont know.

if you believe in free will your an fucking idiot who probably thinks the sun revolves around the earth.

there is not a single coherent argument for free will.

you can't even define free will in a way that makes sense.

mostly when people talk about "free will", they just mean "will". i think it's a big problem for post-christian societies because people say, 'well this person chose to commit this crime from free will, therefore they're evil and should be punished', rather than, 'a series of events caused this crime to happen, how can we stop that from happening again'. as well as the idea that rich people became rich because they just decided to one day, which anybody could do if they only put their mind to it, and therefore they shouldn't be taxed.

Edited 3/5/2015 17:42:12

Ranek:
I see our universe as finite, existing as a self-contained area in a higher dimension (or something like it). In that higher dimension, I imagine that other self-contained universes also exist. Each universe is like a bubble (though not necessarily shaped anything like one), and several are just "floating" around. They could theoretically interact, but are probably such a rare occurrence that they typically don't.

I like the idea of a multiverse because explaining why only one universe exists seems more daunting than explaining universes as things that happen naturally from time to time.

There are Physicists and Cosmologists with a wide variety of opinions on the nature of universe(s). Ultimately though, it's not really science because we can't prove the existence or non existence of something we can't interact with.

Edited 3/5/2015 20:59:22

No free will.

Can chemicals choose to react with each other? No.
If you're drunk, can you simply WILL yourself to be sober?

Your brain is a very complicated mix of chemical and electrical signalling. Although it's a very simple way of looking at it, I find this holds true. A few weeks ago my doctors tried to put me on prozac (fluoxetine) for depression, but I had some sort of reaction to it. I felt high for like 5 days and it made me talk super fast and non-stop, which is the complete opposite of my regular personality. I also kept trying to inappropriately touch one of my female teachers.

So basically, anyone who has taken mind-altering medication should know that your decisions, thoughts, and behavior are all dependent upon the chemicals in your brain.

Edited 3/5/2015 21:01:04

That kind of thought just MAKE you depressive. Do not think about these chemical in relation to free will and you feel much better. Free will exist due to the idea we have a free will and we act on the free will idea.
Free will does not exist for people who already have an explanation for everything including the working of their mind.

if you believe in free will your an fucking idiot who probably thinks the sun revolves around the earth.


Many people belive in free will and know we revolve around the sun.




mostly when people talk about "free will", they just mean "will". i think it's a big problem for post-christian societies because people say, 'well this person chose to commit this crime from free will, therefore they're evil and should be punished', rather than, 'a series of events caused this crime to happen, how can we stop that from happening again'.

Both are done by christians





as well as the idea that rich people became rich because they just decided to one day, which anybody could do if they only put their mind to it, and therefore they shouldn't be taxed.


Why is this relevant. The rich should be taxed a little bit more then the mass but not much.