Serious A free will being

[Deleted Member 76607]

a theoretical omnipotent being preceding causality and the big bang could have free will as it's decisions aren't bound to causality.

@Darkeningstar @h3artara

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

could be called god by many

 

[milkjar]

my guy really does spawn camp new teenage female users

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

my guy really does spawn camp new teenage female users

Which female ?

 

[milkjar]

Which female ?

@h3artara is about to be a victim

 

[Superbia]

we dont even have proof causality exists, its an invented concept that helps us navigate repeating patterns of things following each other temporally

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

@h3artara is about to be a victim

I thought it was a guy ?

 

[milkjar]

I thought it was a guy ?

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

we dont even have proof causality exists, its an invented concept that helps us navigate repeating patterns of things following each other temporally

Fair

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

we dont even have proof causality exists, its an invented concept that helps us navigate repeating patterns of things following each other temporally

But assuming it does exist

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

I don’t forget to participate in your shitty threads do I ?

 

[Superbia]

But assuming it does exist

i still dont think the OP makes sense because the notion of "will" is predicated on causation

will is a power, and power implies cause and effect (x has the power to cause effect y)

 

[h3artara]

I thought it was a guy ?

'it' ...
made a whole ass post saying im done larping as a moid btw

a theoretical omnipotent being preceding causality and the big bang could have free will as it's decisions aren't bound to causality.

@Darkeningstar @h3artara

true, then the usual framework of determinism doesnt apply, because determinism requires a chain of cause and effect within spacetime. if causality itself begins with the big bang then anything 'outside' or 'before' that would not be constrained by causal necessity.

here's the issues you have to consider tho
if its decisions are completely uncaused then you might say they are 'free' in the sense of not being determined.
pn the other hand if choices are truly uncaused then some would say they are random, not free in the meaningful sense of intentional agency.

so the question becomes does free will require uncaused intentionality or just the absence of external determination?

 

[h3artara]

we dont even have proof causality exists, its an invented concept that helps us navigate repeating patterns of things following each other temporally

hume's problem of causation

then i guess that leaves us with two possible stances regarding the omnipotent being idea:

if causality is real: then a being 'outside' it could be free in the way OP described.
if it isnt: then the being’s freedom is even harder to think about, because 'free from causality' becomes 'free from our only way of describing events.'

now there's the question of whether free will is possible only if causality is real or if it requires stepping outside causality

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

does free will require uncaused intentionality or just the absence of external determination?

I prefer the Libertarian answer tbh

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

hume's problem of causation

then i guess that leaves us with two possible stances regarding the omnipotent being idea:

if causality is real: then a being 'outside' it could be free in the way OP described.
if it isnt: then the being’s freedom is even harder to think about, because 'free from causality' becomes 'free from our only way of describing events.'

now there's the question of whether free will is possible only if causality is real or if it requires stepping outside causality

But how can free will exist outside causality tho ? Assuming it ( causality)does exist

 

[h3artara]

i still dont think the OP makes sense because the notion of "will" is predicated on causation

will is a power, and power implies cause and effect (x has the power to cause effect y)

instead of seeing will as a cause among causes a being outside causality would have a primordial will: the ability to originate decisions that dont fit into cause and effect relations at all.
then in this view 'will' = the act of choosing regardless of causal mechanics.

human will depends on causal structures for eg neurons → muscles move (lowk shitty example i couldnt think of anything better) but a transcendent being's will could be of a different order not an event in a causal chain but why causal chains exist in the first place.

 

[Superbia]

so the question becomes does free will require uncaused intentionality or just the absence of external determination?

free will isnt a logical concept, its a category error -- only agents can be free, powers like the will can't be anymore free than gravity or electromagnetic force can

 

[h3artara]

I prefer the Libertarian answer tbh

explain

 

[milkjar]

instead of seeing will as a cause among causes a being outside causality would have a primordial will: the ability to originate decisions that dont fit into cause and effect relations at all.
then in this view 'will' = the act of choosing regardless of causal mechanics.

human will depends on causal structures for eg neurons → muscles move (lowk shitty example i couldnt think of anything better) but a transcendent being's will could be of a different order not an event in a causal chain but why causal chains exist in the first place.

a foid user who writes anything longer than 3 lines? definitely a femcel

 

[h3artara]

a foid user who writes anything longer than 3 lines? definitely a femcel

did i not say im a femcel milkjar this is just proof
also god forbid i get to be a geek about philosophy

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

explain

That Free will requires uncaused intentionality. As I don’t think free will exists inside a causal universe.

 

[milkjar]

did i not say im a femcel milkjar this is just proof
also god forbid i get to be a geek about philosophy

every other foid here is incapable of abstract thought

 

[h3artara]

But how can free will exist outside causality tho ? Assuming it ( causality)does exist

as i said
if you assume causality is absolutely necessary for 'will' then free will outside causality is impossible.
but if you broaden 'will' to mean origination and intentionality or even the ground of causation, then it’s conceivable that a being could have free will outside causality tho its a kind of will we cant experience ourselves since we’re stuck inside the causal web.

 

[h3artara]

every other foid here is incapable of abstract thought

dare i say im intelligencepilled

 

[milkjar]

dare i say im intelligencepilled

alright buddy never said you can self glaze

 

[h3artara]

free will isnt a logical concept, its a category error -- only agents can be free, powers like the will can't be anymore free than gravity or electromagnetic force can

ure right that free will applies to agents not to abstract forces like gravity. but the will isnt like gravity its bound up with intentionality.
when we talk about ‘free will’ we mean the agent's capacity to initiate intentional choices not determined by prior causes we dont mean the power itself being free in isolation bc thats a diff category than a natural force.

mb if my rambles dont make sense btw

 

[h3artara]

alright buddy never said you can self glaze

what happened to protecting this bebeh

 

[Superbia]

the ability to originate decisions that dont fit into cause and effect relations at all.

-ability
-originate
-decision
are all meaningless without the concept of causation

then in this view 'will' = the act of choosing regardless of causal mechanics

action also requires causation im afraid

human will depends on causal structures for eg neurons → muscles move (lowk shitty example i couldnt think of anything better) but a transcendent being's will could be of a different order not an event in a causal chain but why causal chains exist in the first place.

but then he would be the cause of the causal chains

 

[Superbia]

ure right that free will applies to agents not to abstract forces like gravity. but the will isnt like gravity its bound up with intentionality.
when we talk about ‘free will’ we mean the agent's capacity to initiate intentional choices not determined by prior causes we dont mean the power itself being free in isolation bc thats a diff category than a natural force.

mb if my rambles dont make sense btw

if they're not determined by prior causes, then they're random

but obviously our power of choosing is determined internally at least in part

i still consider that as being free, since freedom to me just means having the power to act according to the will, regardless of whether the will was determined or not

 

[Spuffy]

an omnipotent being's "decisions" wouldn't just be unfettered by cause and consequence if it actually existed before causation. They would also come before the idea of a decision. We only think of free will in opposition to determinism, although determinism doesn't exist outside of causation. Therefore, referring to it as "free will" may be a category error. It's putting something outside of time into a human, temporal framework.

Even crazier is the fact that if this being created reality, then its will is not only free but also creates the potential for choices. makes "is will itself the fundamental substance of reality?" the new question instead of "does it have free will?"