Does life have free will or choice?

[Delta4Embassy]

Fascinating topic only just starting to get studied and talked about: genetic fate. Do our genes dictate our behaviours? From homosexuality to criminality to the most inane minutia. Is it all because of genes?

Genes the Environment and Free Will - Oxford Scholarship

"An excellent example of genetic control of behavior is found in voles, where a single gene encoding the receptor for the neuropeptide vasopressin, has a profound effect on a wide range of social activities. This gene is now being examined in humans affected with autism. Genes for neurotransmitter receptors, and for protein neurotransmitters, are strong candidates for behavioral genes in humans. But the environment also plays a role in modifying our underlying genotypes. It is known that environmental experiences can alter both the structure and the function of the human nervous system. But we alter our environment actively or passively based on our genotypes. We also select certain things from our environment, and exclude others. Our interpretation of free will is affected by how we consider these two influences. Is who we are dictated entirely by our genes? Or is it dictated entirely by our environment? Our genes are not subject to interference by others. But social scientists can use the environment to change who we are. Which is the lesser evil?"

 

[Meriweather]

Fascinating topic only just starting to get studied and talked about: genetic fate. Do our genes dictate our behaviours? From homosexuality to criminality to the most inane minutia. Is it all because of genes?

Genes the Environment and Free Will - Oxford Scholarship

"An excellent example of genetic control of behavior is found in voles, where a single gene encoding the receptor for the neuropeptide vasopressin, has a profound effect on a wide range of social activities. This gene is now being examined in humans affected with autism. Genes for neurotransmitter receptors, and for protein neurotransmitters, are strong candidates for behavioral genes in humans. But the environment also plays a role in modifying our underlying genotypes. It is known that environmental experiences can alter both the structure and the function of the human nervous system. But we alter our environment actively or passively based on our genotypes. We also select certain things from our environment, and exclude others. Our interpretation of free will is affected by how we consider these two influences. Is who we are dictated entirely by our genes? Or is it dictated entirely by our environment? Our genes are not subject to interference by others. But social scientists can use the environment to change who we are. Which is the lesser evil?"

From the Biblical point of view, free will, free choice does not equate to having the ability to choose the perfect height, weight, complexion, and beauty. We cannot choose our parents, and we cannot choose to be the owners of the Crown Jewels.

What we can choose is if when presented with a choice of good or evil, we can choose to do good, or we can choose to do evil.

 

[saveliberty]

Behavior apologists must be very happy.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Fascinating topic only just starting to get studied and talked about: genetic fate. Do our genes dictate our behaviours? From homosexuality to criminality to the most inane minutia. Is it all because of genes?

Genes the Environment and Free Will - Oxford Scholarship

"An excellent example of genetic control of behavior is found in voles, where a single gene encoding the receptor for the neuropeptide vasopressin, has a profound effect on a wide range of social activities. This gene is now being examined in humans affected with autism. Genes for neurotransmitter receptors, and for protein neurotransmitters, are strong candidates for behavioral genes in humans. But the environment also plays a role in modifying our underlying genotypes. It is known that environmental experiences can alter both the structure and the function of the human nervous system. But we alter our environment actively or passively based on our genotypes. We also select certain things from our environment, and exclude others. Our interpretation of free will is affected by how we consider these two influences. Is who we are dictated entirely by our genes? Or is it dictated entirely by our environment? Our genes are not subject to interference by others. But social scientists can use the environment to change who we are. Which is the lesser evil?"

From the Biblical point of view, free will, free choice does not equate to having the ability to choose the perfect height, weight, complexion, and beauty. We cannot choose our parents, and we cannot choose to be the owners of the Crown Jewels.

What we can choose is if when presented with a choice of good or evil, we can choose to do good, or we can choose to do evil.

If, big if, God exists AND created us, he also then created our genes. And if as we're beginning to discover genes determine our behaviours, then we don't really have the free will we thought we had.

 

[Meriweather]

Fascinating topic only just starting to get studied and talked about: genetic fate. Do our genes dictate our behaviours? From homosexuality to criminality to the most inane minutia. Is it all because of genes?

Genes the Environment and Free Will - Oxford Scholarship

"An excellent example of genetic control of behavior is found in voles, where a single gene encoding the receptor for the neuropeptide vasopressin, has a profound effect on a wide range of social activities. This gene is now being examined in humans affected with autism. Genes for neurotransmitter receptors, and for protein neurotransmitters, are strong candidates for behavioral genes in humans. But the environment also plays a role in modifying our underlying genotypes. It is known that environmental experiences can alter both the structure and the function of the human nervous system. But we alter our environment actively or passively based on our genotypes. We also select certain things from our environment, and exclude others. Our interpretation of free will is affected by how we consider these two influences. Is who we are dictated entirely by our genes? Or is it dictated entirely by our environment? Our genes are not subject to interference by others. But social scientists can use the environment to change who we are. Which is the lesser evil?"

From the Biblical point of view, free will, free choice does not equate to having the ability to choose the perfect height, weight, complexion, and beauty. We cannot choose our parents, and we cannot choose to be the owners of the Crown Jewels.

What we can choose is if when presented with a choice of good or evil, we can choose to do good, or we can choose to do evil.

If, big if, God exists AND created us, he also then created our genes. And if as we're beginning to discover genes determine our behaviours, then we don't really have the free will we thought we had.

I'm not sure of what free will you thought that we had, but my thoughts are that our choices, while influenced by many parameters (genes, environment, upbringing) it is the individual who makes choices within these parameters.

 

[Sbiker]

Fascinating topic only just starting to get studied and talked about: genetic fate. Do our genes dictate our behaviours? From homosexuality to criminality to the most inane minutia. Is it all because of genes?

Genes the Environment and Free Will - Oxford Scholarship

"An excellent example of genetic control of behavior is found in voles, where a single gene encoding the receptor for the neuropeptide vasopressin, has a profound effect on a wide range of social activities. This gene is now being examined in humans affected with autism. Genes for neurotransmitter receptors, and for protein neurotransmitters, are strong candidates for behavioral genes in humans. But the environment also plays a role in modifying our underlying genotypes. It is known that environmental experiences can alter both the structure and the function of the human nervous system. But we alter our environment actively or passively based on our genotypes. We also select certain things from our environment, and exclude others. Our interpretation of free will is affected by how we consider these two influences. Is who we are dictated entirely by our genes? Or is it dictated entirely by our environment? Our genes are not subject to interference by others. But social scientists can use the environment to change who we are. Which is the lesser evil?"

From the Biblical point of view, free will, free choice does not equate to having the ability to choose the perfect height, weight, complexion, and beauty. We cannot choose our parents, and we cannot choose to be the owners of the Crown Jewels.

What we can choose is if when presented with a choice of good or evil, we can choose to do good, or we can choose to do evil.

If, big if, God exists AND created us, he also then created our genes. And if as we're beginning to discover genes determine our behaviours, then we don't really have the free will we thought we had.

But genes determine only our biological behaviour, ideal for a single mindless monkey. Instead of it we have ehtic and religion, which through "good and evil" determine our social ideals. And our free will is permanent choice between biological, social and maybe any private models of behaviour...

 

[midcan5]

Free will versus determinism is an debate that will go forever. I am always fascinated by the behaviors and excuses for behavior humans give under a variety of circumstance - even historical circumstances. Can anyone claim the devil made them do it today? Or they were (or are) insane at the moment of action? Or that some hex was placed on them causing their behavior? It was my parents who made me who I am, not my fault? Anyone watch 'ID, Investigation Discovery,' it will challenge your feelings for humans forever. What fascinates me is the rationalization or exculpatory explanations. Some crimes appear to make little sense at all. But all crimes and actions can be explained within a context of events and persons. Interesting stuff below.

"Core morality tells us that people have a right to what they earn by their own efforts freely exercised. It is this part of core morality that Ayn Rand objectivists, libertarians, and other right wingers tap into when they insist that taxation is slavery... The trouble with such arguments is that nothing is earned, nothing is deserved. Even if there really were moral rights to the fruit of our freely exercised abilities and talents, these talents and abilities are never freely acquired or exercised. Just as your innate and acquired intelligence and abilities are unearned, so also are your ambitions, along with the discipline, the willingness to train, and other traits that have to be combined with your talents and abilities to produce anything worthwhile at all.... We don't earn our inborn (excuse the expression "God given") talents and abilities. We had nothing to do with whether these traits were conferred on us or not. Similarly, we didn't earn the acquired character traits needed to convert these talents into achievements. They, too, were the result of deterministic processes (genetic and cultural) that were set in motion long before we were born. That is what excludes the possibility that we earned or deserve them. We were just lucky to have the combination of hardwired abilities and learned ambitions that resulted in the world beating a path to our door....No one ever earned or deserved the traits that resulted in the inequalities we enjoy - greater income and wealth, better health and longer life, admiration and social distinction, comfort, and leisure. Therefore, no one, including us, has a moral right to those inequalities. Core morality may permit unearned inequalities, but it is certainly not going to require them without some further moral reason to do so." Alex Rosenberg 'The Atheist's Guide to Reality'


FREE WILL Sam Harris

Ask A Philosopher What Does New Brain Science Mean For Free Will CommonHealth


"These experiments have caused philosophers of mind to ask:

If the choice is determined in the brain unconsciously before we decide to act, where is free will?

Are these choices predetermined? Is our experience of freely willing our actions only an illusion, a rationalization after the fact? Freud, Helmholtz, and Libet would disagree and argue that the choice is freely made but that it is made without our awareness. Libet, for example, proposes that the process of initiating a voluntary action occurs in an unconscious part of the brain but that just before the action is initiated, consciousness is recruited to approve or veto the action. In the 200 milliseconds before a finger is lifted, consciousness determines whether it moves or not.

Whatever the reasons for the delay between decision and awareness, Libet's findings now raise the moral question: Is one to be held responsible for decisions that are made without conscious awareness?"

Eric R. Kandel is a biochemist and university professor at Columbia University. The excerpt [bold added] is from an essay taken from his recent book, 'In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind.'


USMB related threads

Destiny and Free Will US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Freedom US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Do my best to avoid ID channel. Just the 'murder porn' shows it seems.

 

[Sbiker]

Free will versus determinism is an debate that will go forever. I am always fascinated by the behaviors and excuses for behavior humans give under a variety of circumstance - even historical circumstances. Can anyone claim the devil made them do it today? Or they were (or are) insane at the moment of action? Or that some hex was placed on them causing their behavior? It was my parents who made me who I am, not my fault? Anyone watch 'ID, Investigation Discovery,' it will challenge your feelings for humans forever. What fascinates me is the rationalization or exculpatory explanations. Some crimes appear to make little sense at all. But all crimes and actions can be explained within a context of events and persons. Interesting stuff below.

"Core morality tells us that people have a right to what they earn by their own efforts freely exercised. It is this part of core morality that Ayn Rand objectivists, libertarians, and other right wingers tap into when they insist that taxation is slavery... The trouble with such arguments is that nothing is earned, nothing is deserved. Even if there really were moral rights to the fruit of our freely exercised abilities and talents, these talents and abilities are never freely acquired or exercised. Just as your innate and acquired intelligence and abilities are unearned, so also are your ambitions, along with the discipline, the willingness to train, and other traits that have to be combined with your talents and abilities to produce anything worthwhile at all.... We don't earn our inborn (excuse the expression "God given") talents and abilities. We had nothing to do with whether these traits were conferred on us or not. Similarly, we didn't earn the acquired character traits needed to convert these talents into achievements. They, too, were the result of deterministic processes (genetic and cultural) that were set in motion long before we were born. That is what excludes the possibility that we earned or deserve them. We were just lucky to have the combination of hardwired abilities and learned ambitions that resulted in the world beating a path to our door....No one ever earned or deserved the traits that resulted in the inequalities we enjoy - greater income and wealth, better health and longer life, admiration and social distinction, comfort, and leisure. Therefore, no one, including us, has a moral right to those inequalities. Core morality may permit unearned inequalities, but it is certainly not going to require them without some further moral reason to do so." Alex Rosenberg 'The Atheist's Guide to Reality'


FREE WILL Sam Harris

Ask A Philosopher What Does New Brain Science Mean For Free Will CommonHealth


"These experiments have caused philosophers of mind to ask:

If the choice is determined in the brain unconsciously before we decide to act, where is free will?

Are these choices predetermined? Is our experience of freely willing our actions only an illusion, a rationalization after the fact? Freud, Helmholtz, and Libet would disagree and argue that the choice is freely made but that it is made without our awareness. Libet, for example, proposes that the process of initiating a voluntary action occurs in an unconscious part of the brain but that just before the action is initiated, consciousness is recruited to approve or veto the action. In the 200 milliseconds before a finger is lifted, consciousness determines whether it moves or not.

Whatever the reasons for the delay between decision and awareness, Libet's findings now raise the moral question: Is one to be held responsible for decisions that are made without conscious awareness?"

Eric R. Kandel is a biochemist and university professor at Columbia University. The excerpt [bold added] is from an essay taken from his recent book, 'In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind.'


USMB related threads

Destiny and Free Will US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Freedom US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

So, we have Free Will as a deterministic phenomen - maybe... But, how would said the Shakespire about it:

To use it or not to use - that is the question