The Problem of Free Will, An alternate arguement |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
![]() ![]() |
The Problem of Free Will, An alternate arguement |
*kryogenix* |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Guest ![]() |
Ok, I guess I was wrong, I'll try to list out my points, just as ABS did. Actually, I haven o idea what I'm doing, because I'm one of them "incompetent religious folks", so plagiarism FTW.
A1: 1 (p1). Free will is the ability to voluntarily choose. 2 (p2). Choice is the ability to decide among a varitety of options. 3 (p3). There must be at least two options for a choice to be present. 4 (p4). There must be a choice for there to be free will. 5 (c1). Therefor, there must be more than two possible options to choose from for there to be free will. A2: 1 (p1). Natural/Scientific law is a rigid body of laws that determine how entities react and interact. 2 (p2). Men exist. 3 (p3). Men are active. 4 (c2). Because of Natural/Scientific law, things are constrained to behave within the statutes given by the law. Thus, given knowledge of the right variables, it is possible to use Natural/Scientific law to write a formula (hereon known as "the formula" that can predict how something will act. A3: 1 (p1). A man does X. 2 (c2). Because of the formula, it is possible to know that the man will do x. 3 (c1). Free will requires that the man could have done otherwise. 4 (p2). If the man could have done otherwise, it would have made Natural/Scientific law wrong (imperfect). 5 (p3). It is impossible for Natural/Scientific law to be imperfect or wrong. 6 (c3). Therefore, it would have been impossible for the man to have done otherwise. A4: 1 (c1). There must be more than two options to choose from for there to be free will. 2 (c2). The formula knows that man will always do X. 3 (c3). Since The formula knows man will always do X, he has no other option aside from X. 4 (c4). Since man has no other option aside from X, he fails to have free will. Food for thought. |
|
|
*kryogenix* |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Guest ![]() |
bump
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
![]() dripping destruction ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 ![]() |
kryo, you're forgetting quantum mechanics.
1. you can know the position or velocity of a particle but not both. the right variables which you say you must know in your argument happen to include both postion and velocity of every single quark that makes up a man. ergo; no, you have not found a loophole in scientific thought. |
|
|
*I Shot JFK* |
![]()
Post
#4
|
Guest ![]() |
You can present this argument in the existing thread, there is too much overlap to justify a new thread.
-Topic Closed- |
|
|
![]() ![]() |