The Argument from Free Will

[Transparent]

definition of choice straight from google:an act of choosing between two or more possibilities.
wallahi i love it how you disregard everyone argument by referring back to your own definition of choice

 

[InaCabdulqadir]

That's a terrible example that you purposely created for deception here because the problem is evident. My definition states that a choice must be two or more options that can be avoided and me telling you in advance doesn't hinder it as I can simply change my decision with you not knowing. I can avoid the choice that I told you I was going to make. Presenting yourself as an example is terrible because you're not omniscient and thus you're not aware of my choices only that which I tell you in advance. Big difference. Let's use the exact same example but without the deception.

If you were given a choice between a cup of wine or a cup of water and Allah, with his omniscience, knows before hand what you'll do, do I really have a choice? Remembering the original definition (a choice is only choice if there are two or more options presented that can be avoided) how could you defend free will? Unless you wish to redefine what free will and choice actually mean.

Seeing as how you gave me the choice, I will redefine free will.

My definition: To do something voluntarily (willingly)

By my above definition:
As long as you pick a choice willingly, you are exercising free will.

 

[The_Cosmos]

definition of choice straight from google:an act of choosing between two or more possibilities.
wallahi i love it how you disregard everyone argument by referring back to your own definition of choice

That is my definition!



I only added in the obvious which is that they must be avoidable. This means that you should be able to avoid choosing one option in favor of the other otherwise it ceases to become a choice.

 

[Transparent]

That is my definition!



I only added in the obvious which is that they must be avoidable. This means that you should be able to avoid choosing one option in favor of the other otherwise it ceases to become a choice.

every dictionary explains the same narrative ,a choice is the ability to select between to or more options .avoidable or not that's what a choice is ,accept it and move on mate.

 

[Jujuman]

You know, Muslims would've got away with the argument that 'the choice is ours but that Allah knows.'

The only reason why they can't get way Scot free is because Allah supposedly decreed everything that will happen "50,000 years before Adam was created" in al-Lawh ul-Mahfudh including the 'choices' we make.

So no, he's not just a knowledgeable witness but also an active player in our affairs according to Islam.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Seeing as how you gave me the choice, I will redefine free will.

My definition: To do something voluntarily (willingly)

By my above definition:
As long as you pick a choice willingly, you are exercising free will.

So you chose the intellectually dishonest way out in choosing to redefine the definition to suit your claim interests then admit that you were wrong. Interesting...

Nonetheless, it's still problematic because you only added in 'willingly' and expected everything to go away. The problem is the definition of choice which you haven't actually clarified on.

 

[The_Cosmos]

every dictionary explains the same narrative ,a choice is the ability to select between to or more options .avoidable or not that's what a choice is ,accept it and move on mate.

Look don't jump in to debates if you don't want to acknowledge the philosophical nature they're being conducted in. In these debates it's wise to clarify the definition even if they're obvious.

If you're given a choice between picking water or wine you should be able to avoid either choice in favor of the other otherwise it ceases to be a choice. That's exactly what the definitions state I just clarified it for the sake of my argument.

 

[InaCabdulqadir]

So you chose the intellectually dishonest way out in choosing to redefine the definition to suit your claim interests then admit that you were wrong. Interesting...

Nonetheless, it's still problematic because you only added in 'willingly' and expected everything to go away. The problem is the definition of choice which you haven't actually clarified on.

Straight from Google:
adjective

1.

(especially of a donation) voluntary.

E.g "free-will offerings"
There was also another definition which was similar to yours.

You may have noticed "willingly" was in brackets, it doesn't need to be there for my definition to apply.

Calling me intellectual dishonest won't make the definition any less true.

Edit: I have addressed Free Will which the thread includes in its title. So I have stayed on the right topic

 

[Madara x]

In order to have free will, you must have more than one option, each of which is avoidable. This means that before you make a choice, there must be a state of uncertainty during a period of potential: you cannot know the future. Even if you think you can predict your decision, if you claim to have free will, you must admit the potential (if not the desire) to change your mind before the decision is final.

A being who knows everything can have no "state of uncertainty." It knows its choices in advance. This means that it has no potential to avoid its choices, and therefore lacks free will. Since a being that lacks free will is not a personal being, a personal being who knows everything cannot exist.

I would like this to be an ordered debate. Bring something to the table.

Somali spot should have a philosophy section

In regards to your ideas; There is the classic answer : No one is free because we are all the slaves of Allah.

Then there are questions that i have: Is it even possible to talk about freedom generally? And what do the words 'free' and 'will' mean again?

 

[The_Cosmos]

Straight from Google:
adjective

1.

(especially of a donation) voluntary.

E.g "free-will offerings"
There was also another definition which was similar to yours.

You may have noticed "willingly" was in brackets, it doesn't need to be there for my definition to apply.

Calling me intellectual dishonest won't make the definition any less true.

I called you intellectually dishonest because instead of addressing my points you chose to change the definitions in your favour (or at least you think it's in your favour).

Nonetheless, it does not invalidate my original position. A choice is only a choice if there are two or more option which can be avoided, you don't have a choice with Allah as his omniscience renders other options void because he knows what you'll do and preordained it. If you're to choose wine then water is not an option because Allah has already preordained wine.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Somali spot should have a philosophy section

In regards to your ideas; There is the classic answer : No one is free because we are all the slaves of Allah.

Then there are questions that i have: Is it even possible to talk about freedom generally? And what do the words 'free' and 'will' mean again?

People don't like that answer anymore because it renders the whole test meaningless, they want to make it valid but then at the same time come to terms with predestination.

Well, I simply work on the definitions and move on from there. A choice is two more options that can be avoided and with Allah, you don't have that.

 

[Madara x]

People don't like that answer anymore because it renders the whole test meaningless, they want to make it valid but then at the same time come to terms with predestination.

Well, I simply work on the definitions and move on from there. A choice is two more options that can be avoided and with Allah, you don't have that.

Here are my two cents:

I don't think we can ever discuss freedom or anything 'free' without slavery. On earth, and amongst people, there are different types of freedoms and different types of bondage. Everything really depends on the context. Also, you can be free from something, and free for something. These two types are different from each other. Were always in bondage, always striving, and yet in bondage to something, so we are never really ever totally free . . . until death.

Will is a whole different topic. Will is something we have before intelligence or knowledge. It's akin to the ruuh that Allah put in us. It has it's own trajectory in life and it is in us. The task of people then is to acquire knowledge to understand the character of their will; I.E Maximize their potential and discover their purpose.
I hope you're following me here. Will is not an action. It is not the force you use to execute a task. It is something already inside us, that we must discover through knowledge. This thing were discovering is our souls character, and its mission on earth.

Following my reasoning (if it sounds reasonable):
Free will is impossible because our 'will' is in bondage to god before we even become material beings.
What we have on earth is the opportunity to actualize our potential but striving to discover the character of our will.
So the whole predetermination v.s free will conflict is totally empty because its based on misunderstandings of words 'free' and 'will'. Misunderstandings which descartes and spinoza made world-wide, but which other philosophers such as lebeniz and schopenhaeur set straight.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Here are my two cents:

I don't think we can ever discuss freedom or anything 'free' without slavery. On earth, and amongst people, there are different types of freedoms and different types of bondage. Everything really depends on the context. Also, you can be free from something, and free for something. These two types are different from each other. Were always in bondage, always striving, and yet in bondage to something, so we are never really ever totally free . . . until death.

Will is a whole different topic. Will is something we have before intelligence or knowledge. It's akin to the ruuh that Allah put in us. It has it's own trajectory in life and it is in us. The task of people then is to acquire knowledge to understand the character of their will; I.E Maximize their potential and discover their purpose.
I hope you're following me here. Will is not an action. It is not the force you use to execute a task. It is something already inside us, that we must discover through knowledge. This thing were discovering is our souls character, and its mission on earth.

Following my reasoning (if it sounds reasonable):
Free will is impossible because our 'will' is in bondage to god before we even become material beings.
What we have on earth is the opportunity to actualize our potential but striving to discover the character of our will.
So the whole predetermination v.s free will conflict is totally empty because its based on misunderstandings of words 'free' and 'will'. Misunderstandings which descartes and spinoza made world-wide, but which other philosophers such as lebeniz and schopenhaeur set straight.

So in essence you're arguing against free will? If so then I agree but it seems we have come at it from completely different philosophical perspectives.

 

[Madara x]

I do take my kufr as my own doing after a long and hard attempt to reconcile two complete contradictions.

"Why did Allah create evil?" That's the problem of evil and it doesn't make sense either. If you create evil, then you are responsible for it. For example, if you leave a gun on the table and some child takes it and kills themselves with it, you are responsible. However, it is not the point of the thread.

Islam is trying to bring together two different points that are philosophically have been found to be illogical. Most people will claim that they feel free therefore they must be free but that doesn't work. Islam tries to bring together libertarian free will (not the same as libertarianism) and hard determinism (Qadr). Philosophically they are both incompatible. Life cannot be determined but free at the same time.

All the potential outcomes of person's life (and actions) are pre-determined by Allah and these outcomes can be infinite.

Multiple outcomes are possible from every single moment and Allah can see all of them.

Different motives drive each person to move in one or another of the million possible direction.

This decision to move in one direction or another isn't managed by the intellect alone, it is primarily managed by the person's inner will (Ruuh or soul).

The will is in bondage to god at a metaphysical level, but it is the key to unlocking infinite possibilities on earth.

Freedom of will is an illusion because it is nothing more than the occasion for a competition between different desires/motives which are guided by the person's inner will (soul).

As schopenhauer states in his book (the world as will and idea) :

“Although man and animal are with equal necessity determined by their motives, man has, as the animal has not, a complete choice, which has often been regarded as a freedom of the will in individual action, although it is no more than the occasion for a fight to the death between several motives, the strongest of which then, of necessity, determines the will. For this the motives must have assumed the form of abstract thoughts, because it is only by means of these that actual deliberation, i.e, a weighing of conflicting reasons for action, is possible.” p.g 193

As a result of his ability to deliberate “freedom of will has been attributed to him, in the belief that his willing is a mere result of the operations of his intellect, without a determined drive which might serve as its basis. In truth, however, the motives work only on the basis and on the assumption of the determined drive, which in his case is a character”pg.194

 

[Madara x]

So in essence you're arguing against free will? If so then I agree but it seems we have come at it from completely different philosophical perspectives.

Well i always enjoy a philosophical exchange. I sort of went a bit in on the other thread. Happy reading

 

[Burhan]

One can change their destiny through their actions because God is just. He says "He wipes records and leaves what he wants put/in place" in the Quran. Without un-feathered freewill, then justice and God's claim that he wipes records if he wants to, and leaves them in place as he wants to would not make sense to me. Also, prophet Mohamed hinted how people can change destiny with prayer. Not completely alter it but at least reduce the original intended effects of it. He gave the example of something bad(major calamity) being reduced to a spike/thorn piercing you due to prayer you prayed without you knowing.

To me, God is capable of anything including altering what he writes on record for people if he pleases. So nothing is set in stone when it comes to his will.

 

[The_Cosmos]

All the potential outcomes of person's life (and actions) are pre-determined by Allah and these outcomes can be infinite.

Multiple outcomes are possible from every single moment and Allah can see all of them.

Different motives drive each person to move in one or another of the million possible direction.

This decision to move in one direction or another isn't managed by the intellect alone, it is primarily managed by the person's inner will (Ruuh or soul).

The will is in bondage to god at a metaphysical level, but it is the key to unlocking infinite possibilities on earth.

Freedom of will is an illusion because it is nothing more than the occasion for a competition between different desires/motives which are guided by the person's inner will (soul).

As schopenhauer states in his book (the world as will and idea) :

“Although man and animal are with equal necessity determined by their motives, man has, as the animal has not, a complete choice, which has often been regarded as a freedom of the will in individual action, although it is no more than the occasion for a fight to the death between several motives, the strongest of which then, of necessity, determines the will. For this the motives must have assumed the form of abstract thoughts, because it is only by means of these that actual deliberation, i.e, a weighing of conflicting reasons for action, is possible.” p.g 193

As a result of his ability to deliberate “freedom of will has been attributed to him, in the belief that his willing is a mere result of the operations of his intellect, without a determined drive which might serve as its basis. In truth, however, the motives work only on the basis and on the assumption of the determined drive, which in his case is a character”pg.194

I completely disagree with how you came to the conclusion you came to. Allah isn't aware of the many motives because to him, there aren't many but only one. Let me explain. To Allah, he already knows your every move and the millions of possibilities you speak about are all illusions because he already knows that which is chosen long before it was "chosen". There's only one outcome not millions.

One can change their destiny through their actions because God is just. He says "He wipes records and leaves what he wants put/in place" in the Quran. Without un-feathered freewill, then justice and God's claim that he wipes records if he wants to, and leaves them in place as he wants to would not make sense to me. Also, prophet Mohamed hinted how people can change destiny with prayer. Not completely alter it but at least reduce the original intended effects of it. He gave the example of something bad(major calamity) being reduced to a spike/thorn piercing you due to prayer you prayed without you knowing.

To me, God is capable of anything including altering what he writes on record for people if he pleases. So nothing is set in stone when it comes to his will.

I'm going to be off for now but I promise to address your points soon. They're riddled with logical fallacies. I'll be arguing that god does not have free will.

Meanwhile I suggest you read this.

https://ffrf.org/legacy/about/bybarker/fang.php

 

[Burhan]

Yea, sure. I have to choose now between gaming or reading your link. I badly want to catch up to my gaming community, but I am not sure at the end of this post which one it will be And it is my choice in the end to follow my desire of which one to do based on my self convincing. I am not the type to blame God for what I do wrong certainly. Without freewill, there is no humanity. We would be similar to other creatures who are exempt from freewill responsibilities. I find it lazy and convenient to blame GOD.

Will be reading your reply when you write back at your convenience. I am not dismissive. I am always on the look out for a challenging thoughts. It is how I learn and grow in faith.

Good night.

 

[Madara x]

I completely disagree with how you came to the conclusion you came to. Allah isn't aware of the many motives because to him, there aren't many but only one. Let me explain. To Allah, he already knows your every move and the millions of possibilities you speak about are all illusions because he already knows that which is chosen long before it was "chosen". There's only one outcome not millions.

Lol No illusions man, for me all possible potential realities are open.

Choice isn't a real thing. Motives compete in every moment and are guided by a inner will that is never known fully until death. Freedom of will is an illusion.

ALLAH knows and see's everything. Praise be to Him.

 

[Burhan]

Well i always enjoy a philosophical exchange. I sort of went a bit in on the other thread. Happy reading

Madara Uchiha, good posts bro. I am an amateur compared to you, so make sure you stick around. Your inputs are excellent man. For me to say something will be similar to throwing salvos behind an older brother for protection. You are doing good.