swim

From the past couple posts you keep on implying groups rather than individuals. I think that my situation is very unique to itself. Everyone is different because of the sequence of events.

Something has happened to me so that I don't agree with what society does. I didn't come up with it on my own.

__________________
http://nakednaps.bandcamp.com/

Sneer

i apologise, i study anthropology at university which is very 'group' based, so thats my natural outlook. We're all bought up with similiar unwritten rules is what im getting at. My point is, at the end of the day, you chose what to do with the money, its your own will.

__________________
Fright Team radio show

swim

lol, and my point is that every little detail matters. From this point we're talking in circles re-itterating points and no one goes anywhere. But it was helpful knowing exactly why people think what they do. Though I really wanted someone to come and point something out I haven't contemplated yet and make me rethink things and make my theory stronger.

__________________
http://nakednaps.bandcamp.com/

Raine

I think free will does exist. unless predestination is proven to be true.

As long as you're capable of counscious thought and have the means and or are capable of acting on those thoughts then you can act out those thoughts and thus it being free will.

Unless of course you're arguing with someone that knows a good deal of psychology. Then free will all becomes actions you commit as a result of some large chain reaction.

__________________
A pair of powerful spectacles has sometimes sufficed to cure a person in love.

~ Friedrich Nietzsche

DontRunMeOver

Going by the wikipedia explanation of free will, I'd say that I agree we have free will in a

1. Religious and
2. Ethical sense

in that

1. If there are any supernatural entitities I don't think that they direct people's actions most of the time. However, I'm extremely atheist so my opinion probably is of no consequence on this matter.
2. People should be held accountable for their actions. In my opinion, this should include anybody in any mental state which wasn't intentionally generated in that person by somebody else for the purpose of getting the first person to perform the action.

However, I don't agree that we have free will in a scientific sense. I think that our thoughts on and responses to external stimulae are entirely dependent upon all previous stimulae which we have been exposed to combined with our own genetic makeup.

The lack of free will in the scientific sense doesn't contradict the idea of free will in the ethical sense. The most obvious application of the ethical idea of free will is how responsible people should be held for the crimes which they commit. And in that respect I believe that even if it is somehow inevitable that a particular person will commit a crime due to their nature and circumstances, they should still be held responsible as it was they who committed the crime*. Further to that I have a lot of thoughts but so many I can't actually figure out which order to write them in!


*There would be a few exceptions to this, although I personally would still count anybody who commits murder, rape or serious violent crime while suffering a mental illness inherent to themselves as being just as accountable as a completely sane person.

__________________

Moon Pix

Human being's have total free will. Total. Your body needs water but you can choose not to drink it. On a long enough timescale you dehydrate and die but that was your choice. It may not be much of a choice but its still one regardless.

__________________
There’s a dream that I see, I pray it can be
Look 'cross the land, shake this land - "Maybe Not", C. Marshall

DontRunMeOver

If you're going to post, don't be so simplistic! And who was the last person you heard of who intentionally drank nothing until they died?

Yes, people could choose to do things, in that their current actions aren't completely hindered by outside influences but is that free WILL, or free ACTION? The question about scientific free will is not just whether we have the ability to act or not act upon our desires, but also whether we can control the desires we get in the first place.

__________________

Urban Hat€monger ?

Please don`t go there again

__________________

DontRunMeOver

I only mentioned it because it was on the page I looked at. If anybody had continued the religious side of it, I planned on telling them to **** off.

__________________

Moon Pix

I answered simplistically because its a simplistic issue and anyway, you could do the same thing with food. Bobby Sands did.


Its all beliefs. Beliefs beliefs beliefs. A smoker believes that they need to smoke a cigarette because their addiction nicotine tells them, they do. Same thing with a heroin addict. Do you realise that heroin addicts feel the same way about heroin that we feel about food and water? The difference is that we will actually die without food or water yet Bobby Sands CHOSE to deprive himself of food in the full knowledge that he was going to die of starvation. A heroin addict can likewise choose to deprive themselves of heroin.

Chemicals and chemical imbalances affect the brain but choices can still be made because the person is aware of these chemicals being there.

__________________
There’s a dream that I see, I pray it can be
Look 'cross the land, shake this land - "Maybe Not", C. Marshall