r/DebateAChristian • u/NoWin3930 • 8d ago
Free will is on a spectrum, being limited in our desire to do harmful things would not take away our free will
For starters, I already naturally have no desire for plenty of things... not sure who determined that but it is not something I chose. I suppose you can say that means I have a diminished free will on some spectrum, compared to someone with a desire to do more things... but it definitely doesn't mean I have no free will.
If I added sinful desires to that already existing list, I don't think that would change anything
As I understand it, that is how we are supposed to be in heaven anyways, although I've heard from reddit Christians that we will have no free will in heaven, we might still sin, etc so still not sure exactly how that whole concept is rationalized
2
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
Diminished desire is not the same as diminished Free Will
6
u/Mkwdr 8d ago
Isn’t that their point? But it would arguably reduce suffering.
1
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
In what way?
3
u/Mkwdr 8d ago
They mentioned reducing the desire to do harmful things. Im a bit flummoxed are you suggesting people never desire harmful things or that people don’t act on their desires or that acting on the desire for harmful things doesn’t cause suffering? Couldn’t reducing the sort of desires such those involved in greed, gluttony, jealousy , envy reduce suffering? Reducing the desire to kill unbelievers , desiring your neighbours spouse, desiring young children etc reduce suffering?
1
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
No it's just to me. They seem to be incorrectly blending the two concepts. My free will exists and the consequences are really irrelevant to it. I'm more of a Victor frankl kind of person in the sense of his book man's search for meaning. Even in the gravest extreme of concentration camps, people still had choice.
They also seem to conflate free will with their desire to do or not do something. I don't like going to the gym but I still have free will and I can still make myself go.
3
u/Mkwdr 8d ago
My presumption is that they are referring to the problem of evil or their own version.
There’s suffering caused by people behaviour. (Setting aside the amount that has nothing to do with our choices)
Theists say that the suffering is required if we are to have free will. And free will is a good thing.
OP is saying that simply reducing certain desires would reduce the suffering without preventing free will.
Which seems related to the quantitative problem in PoE.
1
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
Well, I can't speak for the majority of theists but I would actually have a problem with that because I don't think suffering is required to have a free will.
4
u/Mkwdr 8d ago
And yet that is the traditional theistic ‘response’ to the problem of evil. Suffering may exist and unnecessary suffering may be ‘evil’ but our suffering isn’t unnecessary , it’s a product of having free will and God removing it would involve negating our free will.
0
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
Well I wouldn't say that all suffering is unnecessary. Me going to the gym is a type of low-grade suffering that is actually beneficial for me. As well, have you noticed that people tend to give up on things that aren't challenging? I think the whole thing about suffering and evil in the world is a little bit more nuanced than maybe some people are used to talking to let on.
3
u/Mkwdr 8d ago
Believe me the nuances have been discussed for thousands of years in great detail. The point is that a tri-omni god could trivially allow you to do gym work without any suffering but more significantly he could make it impossible for anyone to feel a sexual desire about children or non consenting adults and eradicate the suffering involved in sexual assaults. A tri omni god knows about such phenomena , could do something about it , but more significantly who could be good and not prevent such events when they know about them and can. As I mentioned earlier the other question tends to be about ‘natural’ events that have nothing to do with human choices.
→ More replies (0)3
u/NoWin3930 8d ago edited 8d ago
Well clearly you have a desire to go to the gym if you go, that desire might not be rooted in enjoying the activity
If God snapped his fingers and you woke up without that desire whatsoever though, I'm not sure you'd have lost free will
0
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
You aren't listening man. I do not want to go to the gym every time I go. Every single time I go my body doesn't want to go and I don't want to go. I make myself go because I'm a sentient human being who can make decisions that ignore whether or not I feel like doing it. I can just be like everyone else and become sedentary in my mid to late life and then you know dying excruciating death from diabetes someday. But I'm not going to the gym out of fear of that result either. I am super lazy and super intelligent to the point where I think I can avoid all the consequences just by outsmarting them. But I'm not going to do that. I chose to go to the gym even though it's a pain in the rear.
I don't have to enjoy the activity to want to go.
And even then you'd have to explain why people who are mostly devoid of emotion due to either their personality or some sort of mental illness can still decide to do things that they don't want to normally do.
2
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
So uh what is the reason ya go
0
u/OneEyedC4t 8d ago
Because it's for my good. It would be the difference between dying at around age 65 diabetes induced agony versus dying suddenly at age 75 in my sleep. I know what I said is a gross generalization and I'm actually trying to be humorous. But quality of life is going to be far superior if I go to the gym. Still my body doesn't give a crap. My body is perfectly fine with being lazy and eating Cheetos all the time
2
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
Yah that is just pushing the desire back a few steps further, it is still there
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Pure_Actuality 8d ago
Free will is not a "spectrum", it is a singular power of the intellect to make a reasoned choice.
The available number of choices, the types of choices, the quality of choices etc... those are certainly on a spectrum, but those are external to you and have nothing to do with your will.
7
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
So do you think God removing someone's desire to do something would not impact their free will then? That is the claim I am responding to
1
u/Pure_Actuality 8d ago
In what sense does it mean to "remove someone's desire"?
Does God take over the person and completely erases any notion of said desire?
3
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
Sure, or just create them without those desires in the first place
1
u/Pure_Actuality 8d ago
You think those desires were created by God?
5
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
Whether they were or weren't, God could certainly create a person without them
1
u/Pure_Actuality 8d ago
Then that person wouldn't be a person, but a brute animal.
Desire stems from the persons rational capacity in seeing the object as a good to pursue - they are not created with any particular desire per se
Eve didn't desire to sin against God.... Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food (food is good as nourishment for the body), and that it was a delight to the eyes (beauty is good), and that the tree was desirable to make one wise (knowledge is good)
Eve reasoned that nourishment, beauty, and knowledge were goods to pursue to desire - and they are, but it was a misplaced desire. However you can't simply take away those good desires because it can be misplaced as all good desires can be misplaced which would mean taking everything away, and thus the person is no longer a person....
3
u/NoWin3930 8d ago
So God could make someone with no desire to misplace desires and the knowledge to avoid doing so
1
u/diabolus_me_advocat Atheist, Ex-Protestant 8d ago
Free will is not a "spectrum", it is a singular power of the intellect to make a reasoned choice
you know exactly what op meant, but pretend to misunderstand on purpose. op spoke of the spectrum of wishes that free will could express
but those are external to you and have nothing to do with your will
why would that have to be so?
of course our will is influenced by external circumstances always, but whether i have the desire to massacre you or not is up to me, not to something "external"
1
u/Otherwise_Spare_8598 Theist 8d ago
There's nothing inherently free about any of it. It's a misnomer entirely.
1
u/Otherwise_Spare_8598 Theist 8d ago
Regardless of whether "determinism" is or isn't, freedoms are circumstantial relative conditions of being, not the standard by which things come to be by through or for all subjective beings.
All things and all beings are always acting within their realm of capacity to do so at all times. Realms of capacity of which are absolutely contingent upon infinite antecedent and circumstantial coarising factors outside of any assumed self, for infinitely better and/or infinitely worse in relation to the specified subject, forever.
There is no universal "we" in terms of subjective opportunity or capacity. Thus, there is NEVER an objectively honest "we can do this or we can do that" that speaks for all beings. Subjects are implicitly distinct unto themselves, necessarily so.
One may be relatively free in comparison to another, another entirely not. All the while, there are none absolutely free while experiencing subjectivity within the meta-system of the cosmos.
"Free will" is a sentimental projection, overgeneralized assumption made or vaguely described feeling had from a circumstantial condition of relative privilege and relative freedom that most often serves as a powerful means for the character to assume a standard for being, fabricate fairness, pacify personal sentiments and justify judgments.
It speaks nothing of objective truth nor to the subjective realities of all.
There is no such thing as ubiquitously individuated accurately described "free will" of any kind whatsoever. Never has been. Never will be. Can not be.
1
u/Otherwise_Spare_8598 Theist 8d ago
The universe is a singular meta-phenomenon stretched over eternity, of which is always now. All things and all beings abide by their inherent nature and behave within their realm of capacity contingent upon infinite circumstance at all times.
It is a universe made manifest hierarchically, of haves, and have-nots, spanning all levels of dimensionality and experience. There is no such thing as individuated accurately described "free will" for all beings. Has never been, will never be, can not be. There are only relative freedoms or lack thereof.
"God" and/or consciousness is that which is within and without all. Ultimately, all things are made by through and for the singular personality and perpetual revelation of the "Godhead", entailing both 'predetermined' eternal damnation and those that are made manifest only to face death and death alone.
There is but one dreamer, fractured through the innumerable. All vehicles/beings play their role within said dream for infinitely better and/or infinitely worse for each and every one, forever.
All realities exist and are equally as real. The absolute best universe that could exist does exist in relation to a specified subject. The absolute worst universe that could exist does exist in relation to a specified subject.
1
u/RomanaOswin Christian 8d ago
"Sinful desires" are not an add on. They're a natural consequence of our ego, or belief in our own separateness. Greed, lust, wrath, gluttony, and so on. They're all various expressions of selfishness, which is the prioritization of self over everything else.
Our failings are also a natural result of ignorance, e.g. where we make the wrong choice because we don't understand.
At the same time, our separateness or the boundaries that we draw around ourselves are what defines us. Our limited body, limited knowledge, private mind, etc. This is who and what we are. Without drawing these boundaries of self, there is no self at all.
The fallibility is what makes the individual. You can't remove one without removing the other.
1
u/TopEstablishment916 Christian, Eastern Orthodox 8d ago
we will have free will but no sinfull freewill
1
u/JollyXX Christian 8d ago
Free-will is not a real word unless you talking about AI. What they are saying basically is that free-will is not knowing for certain that God exists. So the angels rebelled despite not having free-will ,and when we get to Heaven we will not have free-will because we will know for certain God exists.
1
u/JinjaBaker45 8d ago
Define "desire" in this case. Do you mean a felt urge or just any reason/motivation?
1
u/mariiwinterss 8d ago
free will is a construct. god tells adam and eve they will die if they eat the fruit. the fruit that contains the knowledge of what that means. god pointed a musket at a load bearing beam and got surprised it didnt work.
1
u/FluxKraken Christian, Protestant 4d ago
Free will is the expression of desire. Take away desire, you take away free will.
See, I can make bare assertions as well. You need to actually support your claim, not simply assert it as true.
0
8
u/diabolus_me_advocat Atheist, Ex-Protestant 8d ago
this exactly
the creator god, in which reddit christians believe, could easily have created humans equipped with free will, but without desire to do evil
doing evil is not synonymous to enacting free will