New discovery

[bumab]

Simply because people have different perceptions of good in different situations does not mean will is not free, it only means wills can disagree about what to do. And that's assuming free will is contingent on everyone doing their perception of "right" in any situation, which is a stretch in itself.

[peacegirl]

Every motion, from the beating heart to the slightest reflex action, from all inner to outer movements of the body, indicates that life is never satisfied to remain in one position for always like an inanimate object, which position shall be termed 'death.' I shall now call the present moment of time or life 'here' for the purpose of clarification, and the next moment come up 'there'. You are now standing on this present moment of time and space called 'here', and you are given two alternatives, either live or kill yourself; either move to the next spot called 'there' or remain where you are without moving a hairs breadth by committing suicide.

[peacegirl]

If you are still reading, then it is obvious that you are not satisfied to stay in one position which is 'death' or 'here' and prefer moving off that spot to 'there', which motion is life. Consequently, the motion of life which is any motion from 'here' to 'there' is a movement away from that which dissatisfied, otherwise, had you been satisfied to remain 'here' or where you are, you would never have moved to 'there'.

 

Since the motion of life constantly moves away from 'here' to 'there', which is an expression of dissatisfaction with the present position, it must obviously move constantly in the direction of greater satisfaction. The truth of the matter is that at any particular moment the motion of man is not free for all life obeys this inavariable law. He is constantly compelled, by his nature, to make choices, decisions, and to prefer of whatever options are available during his lifetime that which he considers better for himself and his set of circumstances.

[peacegirl]

For example, when he found that a discovery like the electric bulb was for his benefit in comparison to candlelight, he was compelled to prefer it for his motion, just being alive, has always been in the direction of greater satisfaction. There is no exception which you will soon observe. Consequently, during every moment of man's progress he always did what he had to do because he had no choice. Although this demonstration proves that man's will is not free, your mind may not be accustomed to grasping these type relations, so I will elaborate.

 

Supposing you wanted very much of two alternatives A, which we shall designate something considered evil by society, instead of B, the humdrum of your regular routine; could you possibly pick B at that particular moment of time if A is preferred as a better alternative when nothing could dissuade you from your decision, not even the threat of the law?

 

What if the clergy, given two alternatives, choose A, which shall now represent something considered good, instead of B, that which is judged evil; would it be possible for them to prefer the latter when the former is available as an alternative?

[peacegirl]

If it is utterly impossible to choose B in this comparison, are they not compelled by their very nature to prefer A; and how can they be free when the favorable difference between A and B is the compulsion of their choice and the motion of life in the direction of greater satisfaction? To be free, according to the definition of free will, man would be able to prefer of two alternatives, either the one he wants or the one he doesn't want, which is an absolute impossibility because selecting what one doesn't want when what one does want, as an alternative, is a motion in the direction of dissatisfaction.

[peacegirl]

Clay, do you want me to continue or not? I don't want to post if no one is interested, and I'm not sure if we are on the same page.

[UncleAl]

Once it is discovered through mathematical reasoning that man's will is definitely not free,

http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html

http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html

http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/video/frankfurt/

 

Do anything you want. Commit suicide, mutilate others, spend your credit limit buying rap CDs, lick the feet of the poor, jump off the Eiffel Tower with a parachute, eat dairy and meat products together, piss on an electric fence... the universe does not care. Die toothless and riddled with parasites at age 30 in the Third World, be Donald Trump, be Marilyn Chambers, be Kim Jong Il or Bush the Lesser or Pope Benny-16. The universe does not care.

 

Take a single atom of tritium and wait. If you had a large number of them 5.5% would beta-decay to helium-3 each year. If you have a single atom you have no idea of and no control over when the decay will occur. The universe does not care. Every event of any kind at any scale merely happens, tempered by probablilty. The chance of winning a State lottery is the same - wthin an epsilon - whether you buy a ticket or not. That people are remarkably chronically stupid about that epsilon often results in a winner. The universe does not care.

 

http://www.mendosa.com/fluke.html

 

If you had anything to say you would say it rather than compressing the smallest idea into the largest prose. Hari Seldon does not exist, even in principle - and Seldon got screwed by the Mule. Paint on the bristles does not guarantee art from the brush.

 

"I used to think it was a terrible thing that life was so unfair. Then I thought, 'What if life were fair, and all of the terrible things that happen to us came because we really deserved them?' Now I take great comfort in the general unfairness and hostility of the universe." - Marcus Cole, Babylon 5

[pgrmdave]

I'm still unsure of how you are trying to disprove free will. I don't believe that people have free will because I think that the mind comes from the brain, which is physical matter, which simply obeys physical law. There is no such thing as choice.

[peacegirl]

http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html

http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html

http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/video/frankfurt/

 

Do anything you want. Commit suicide, mutilate others, spend your credit limit buying rap CDs, lick the feet of the poor, jump off the Eiffel Tower with a parachute, eat dairy and meat products together, piss on an electric fence... the universe does not care. Die toothless and riddled with parasites at age 30 in the Third World, be Donald Trump, be Marilyn Chambers, be Kim Jong Il or Bush the Lesser or Pope Benny-16. The universe does not care.

 

Take a single atom of tritium and wait. If you had a large number of them 5.5% would beta-decay to helium-3 each year. If you have a single atom you have no idea of and no control over when the decay will occur. The universe does not care. Every event of any kind at any scale merely happens, tempered by probablilty. The chance of winning a State lottery is the same - wthin an epsilon - whether you buy a ticket or not. That people are remarkably chronically stupid about that epsilon often results in a winner. The universe does not care.

 

http://www.mendosa.com/fluke.html

 

If you had anything to say you would say it rather than compressing the smallest idea into the largest prose. Hari Seldon does not exist, even in principle - and Seldon got screwed by the Mule. Paint on the bristles does not guarantee art from the brush.

 

"I used to think it was a terrible thing that life was so unfair. Then I thought, 'What if life were fair, and all of the terrible things that happen to us came because we really deserved them?' Now I take great comfort in the general unfairness and hostility of the universe." - Marcus Cole, Babylon 5

 

The universe does not care, that is true, but our nature forces us to choose between alternatives that we deem better for ourselves. Regardless of what a person does, he does it because it gives him greater satisfaction at that particular moment in time to do it than not to do it. That is all I am saying at this point. I want to continue and not get side tracked. We can talk after everyone understands the explanation, if that is desired. I cannot condense something that will take it completely out of context and definitely allow me to be vulnerable to attacks of people calling me a fraud. I'm trying to avoid that if at all possible.

[peacegirl]

I'm still unsure of how you are trying to disprove free will. I don't believe that people have free will because I think that the mind comes from the brain, which is physical matter, which simply obeys physical law. There is no such thing as choice.

 

Please try to put your reason for believing in determinism aside for a moment so that I can explain the definition I am giving, otherwise, we will be unable to communicate as effectively as I would hope. We don't have to understand why man's will is not free to follow the principles in this book, but by doing so we can clearly see how this knowledge can prevent what we don't want (war and crime), so if you will allow me to continue, I will appreciate it. I want to go in a step by step manner so I don't skip around and confuse people anymore than they already might be.

[peacegirl]

Let's take another example and put the conclusive proof that man's will is not free to a mathematical test.

 

Imagine that you were taken prisoner in war time for espionage and condemned to death, but mercifully given a choice between two exists: A is the painless hemlock of Socrates, while B is death by having your head held under water. The letters A and B, representing small or large differences, are compared. The difference (or choice) which is considered favorable, regardless of the reason, is the compulsion of greater satisfaction desire is forced to take which makes one of them (the one that is less favorable) an impossible choice in this comparison simply because it gives less satisfaction under the circumstances.

 

Is it humanly possible, providing no other conditions are introduced to affect your decision, to prefer exit B if A is offered as an alternative? Yet it is stated that good or evil can be chosen without compulsion or necessity despite the obvious fact that there is a tremendous amount of compulsion. If your will is free you should be able to choose B just as well as A.

 

You might reply, "This is ridiculous for you are not giving me any choice." You most certainly do have a choice, and if you are free you should be able to choose B just as well as A. The reason you are confused is because the word 'choice' is very misleading for it assumes that man has two or more possibilities, but in reality this is a delusion because the direction of life, always moving towards greater satisfaction, compels a person to prefer of differences what he considers better for hiimself and when two or more alternatives are presented he is compelled, by his very nature, to prefer not that one which he considers worse but what gives every indication of being better for the particular set of circumstances involved.

[bumab]

This all operates under the assumption people always choose what's best for themselves. What about self-sacrafice for your friends? Or choosing the more painful death out of spite?

 

Before you continue you should show that people always choose the more comfortable "forward" path.

[peacegirl]

Great question and I will show you that whatever some does, regardless of their motivation for doing it, is still in the direction of greater satisfaction.

[peacegirl]

Choosing, or the comparison of differences, is an integral part of man's nature but he is compelled to prefer of alternatives the one he considers better for himself. Consequently, even though he chooses various things all through the course of his life, he is never given any choice at all. Although the definition of free will states that man can choose good or evil without compulsion or necessity, how is it possible for the will of man to be free when choice is under a tremendous amount of compulsion to choose the most preferable alternative each and every moment of time?

 

How many times in your life have you remarked, ‘You give me no choice' or ‘it makes no difference'?"

Just because some differences are so obviously superior in value where you are concerned that no hesitation is required to decide which is preferable, while other differences need a more careful consideration, doesn't change the direction of life which moves always and ever towards greater satisfaction; but what one person judges good or bad for himself doesn't make it so for others especially when it is remembered that a juxtaposition of differences in each case present alternatives that affect choice.

[bumab]

when?

[peacegirl]

This explains why two people when confronted with the same situation may pick the opposite alternative as that which they consider better for themselves. Once a choice is made, however, it is also true that hindsight may elicit a different response the next time a similar situation presents itself because man is always learning from previous experience, but this does not change the fact that we are always moving in the direction of greater satisfaction during every moment of our existence.

 

Someone who believed he had proof that man can move in the direction of dissatisfaction offered the following example.

 

He began, "Let us imagine that of two apples, a red and a yellow, I prefer the yellow because I am extremely allergic to the red, consequently my taste lies in the direction of the latter which gives me greater satisfaction. In fact, the very thought of eating the red apple makes me feel sick. Yet in spite of this I am going to eat it to demonstrate that even though I am dissatisfied – and prefer the yellow apple – I can definitely move in the direction of dissatisfaction."

[peacegirl]

In response to this demonstration, isn't it obvious that regardless of the reason he decided to eat the red apple, and even though it would be distasteful in comparison, this choice at that moment of time gave him greater satisfaction, otherwise, he would have definitely selected and eaten the yellow? The normal circumstances under which he frequently ate the yellow apple in preference were changed by his desire to prove a point; therefore, it gave him greater satisfaction to eat what he did not normally eat in an effort to prove that life can be made to move in the direction of dissatisfaction. Consequently, since B (eating the yellow apple at that moment of time) was an impossible choice, he was not free to choose A.

 

Regardless of how many examples you experiment with, the results will always be the same because this is an immutable law. From moment to moment, all through life, man can never move in the direction of dissatisfaction, and that his every motion, conscious or unconscious, is a natural effort to get rid of some dissatisfaction or move to greater satisfaction, otherwise, as has been shown, not being dissatisfied, he could never move from here to there.