| נשלח ב-23/9/2005 14:50 |
 |
| |
Free Will ? What does it mean?
Some people have a problem with Free Will because it says that something happened without the common cause and effect scenario i.e. they claim that every phenomena has to have a cause so they ask what's the cause of the decision being made, and they inferr that there must be some previous cause that led to each decision a person ever makes.
I don't have a problem with anything existing without a cause (all existence is ultimatly without cause) I have a problem in undertanding what is meant by free will. If we realize that 'I' am the sum total of my concsiousness then this action either happens due to the sum total of my consciousness (which means previuous situations, ciurcumstances) or it happens totally randomly out of the blue which is again not my credit
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-28/9/2005 18:16 |
|
| |
I guess people mean by "free will" the following [absurd]: the ability of taking a decision or action while I actually could have taken a totally different decision as well.
So next to "what is free will" it seems that one should ask himself: "Does it have any meaning saying that things could have evaluated different than as thy did?"
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 02:11 |
|
| |
For the sake of this discussion here, I shall not ask whether the existance of such a proposition as free will is true or false, but rather what is the significance [towards religion that is] of the existence of such an entity.
This question is truly a troubling one to me, as in real life, I can hardly understand the existance of such an entity.
תוקן על ידי - עליכם_שלום - 03/10/2005 2:12:55
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 02:49 |
|
| |
Aleikhem Shalom-
I really don't understand what you're saying. The meaning of free will in real life is quite clear. On the contrary, doesn't every sane person conduct his life with a basic assumption of free will? Don't we all make conscious decisions all the time?
It seems that it is only in philosophy class that free will becomes a problem.סשמאל]
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 04:02 |
|
| |
Sherira,
It seems to me that Aleichem is saying the same thing I was trying to say. That the for Free Will to be free it needs to be completely independent of all my previous consciousnness and awareness, the decision is not based on any data or concepts that are in my mind up to this moment (a hypothetical person with the same exact data as myself can allegedly decide differently than myself which tells us that pervious data were not the decisive factor). By definition that means that its not me (the conscious entity called me) that is making the decision. This being the case, it becomes irrelavent if there is a mechanisim in me that spits out decisions totally randomly or that the randomness is only an illusion. In both cases there is no acountability.
Also, if there is no real ethical values, if it's only a social contract etc. then the reason and validation for punishing evil is for social benefit of society at large then what does it matter if the guy had a choice or not? Surely we all agree that by establishing a punishment system we have made it much more likely that the decision (the forced one, the one based on my circumstances) will be in many cases not to do that action due to the undesirable effect.(you agree that the fact of fire being painfull causes people not to put their hand in it, regardless if one subscribes to 'free will').
So in the end who cares if there really is 'free will' whatever that means.
 |
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 06:46 |
|
| |
Uny and Sherira,
Let me please explain my dilemma.
First to the question that Uny raised.
And I quote ''So in the end who cares if there really is 'free will' whatever that means.''
Well, that would be fine, if we have no need (in Judaic law) to have our beliefs conform to a certain set of standards.
Being that there indeed is a bare minimum of beliefs to which a Yid has to conform in order to maintain his status as a believing Jew, we certainly do care if there is such an entity as ''free will''.
Now to the point Shrira is saying, that in real life there is no questioning of ''free will'', I resist.
In my humble opinion, in real life, there is no such a thing as ''free will''.
And just to make that clear, this is not a theological question, but rather a sociological one.
Therefore, a problem would certainly arise, if a theology is based on a given fact, which proves to be false, what remains of the theology…
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 06:54 |
|
| |
Aleichem,
Do you know that R' Chasdai Crescras claims that there is no free will. He was a blieving Jew to boot. I think there is one other Rishon who is of such opinion too.
The point is that even the Rambam doesn't include it in the 13 Ikarim.
תוקן על ידי - עני_בפתח - 03/10/2005 6:54:11
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 07:04 |
|
| |
The Ikarim claims that there are only three Ikarim in Judaism. I think they are Achdus Haborah, Schar Ve'onesh and Torah Min Hashomaim.
If one can understand the whole Torah without making use of the concept of Free Will then I can still claim that the truth or otherwise of this concept is irrelevant
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 07:39 |
|
| |
Is schar vuonesh not a direct variation of free will?
If I'm not mistaken, the Ikarim explains this quite clearly, that bechira is a prerequisite to believing in schar vuonesh.
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-3/10/2005 08:20 |
|
| |
If you put your hand in fire your Onesh is that you'll get burned, is this only possible if there is Bechira?
God tells us that the system He created works that if you do good deeds you get good candies just like if you throw something up gravity will force it down (on your head, if you don't get out of the way) and just like that when you eat you'll be rewarded with a good feeling in your stomach.
By letting us know all of the information he is helping us in the choice of ending up with a lot of good candies. Yes I used the word choice, but not in a way of free choice, on the contrary, this data may force me to do good the same way boiling soup forces me to wait till it cools off.
It is a very benevolent God that created a system where doing good and helping others etc. is actually beneficial to yourself, and where this knowledge forces you to do good. The more you are made aware of the pain involved in doing bad and the pleasure in doing good the more you will be forced to go in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-7/10/2005 04:59 |
|
| |
Word,
Your explanation does indeed give another perspective to the way we understand "schar vu'onesh".
Though, its worthy to note, that our dilemma here is understanding "bechira", and not "schar vuonesh".
To explain the problem again, I shall elaborate on this once more, and "my" problem is as follows.
The rishonim have many opinions as to what is included in the "ikrei emuna".
The "baal hikurim" explains, the significance of the ikurim, that these are differnt than any other mitsvos and chiyuvim, and that an "ikar" by definition, is something that defines the Mosaic religion.
One of the "ikarim" that there are no dissenting opinions as to it being included in the "ikurim", is the "chiyuv" of believing in the existence of "schar vuonesh".
If "schar vuonesh" is as you explain it and nothing more, then there is no believing involved.
It also contradicts the popular understanding amongst the rishonim, that explains the belief in "bechira" as imperative to the belief in "schar vuonesh".
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-7/10/2005 12:40 |
|
| |
Hi
First of all I want to congraulate you guys for the opening of this new virtual Beit Midrash . I wish you a lot of success.
Second, I just bumped in into this eshkol . What an interesting coincidence , I just opened at the same time an eshkol in the Hebrew forum with exactly the same argument as that of עני בפתח . Doesn't this point to the existence of some form of collective consciousness , shared by all members of the atzkach community  ?
BTW do you object to writing in Hebrew un this forum? It's quite difficult for me to write in English.
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-7/10/2005 16:21 |
|
| |
Hi Mietzitz,
Thanks for joining in. I would assume that 95% of the writers and readers here understand Hebrew, so Hebrew writing is welcome, most assuredly so if that will help us lure you here.
I saw your Eshkol and to be honest I got dizzy from all these long posts in Hebrew (in English I would just skim it through quickly to see if they are up to something at all) I didn't see anybody really answering or even addressing your (and mine) question properly.
As I'm sure your aware, there is the whole Ishbitze school of thought, R' Tzadok being one if it's more known philosophers, who basically do away with Bechira. It's amazing how they got away with it with hardly a slap on the wrist.
The above is also a response to Aliechems argument that 'all' Jewish Philosophers were of the opinion that Behcira is one of the Ikerie Emunah. (and that is besides the Or Hashem)
|
|
|
|
|
