[quote=“mnben87, post:1658, topic:268570”]
I wouldn’t say exclusively, but bound choices are still choices. Which implicate freewill. And I whole heartily agree with his statement. Even if we have freewill, we are constrained. Are you going to marry Julie or Sarah? One big choice between two entirely different futures. But, for the sake of argument you are still bound because you have only the two choices. And it will mean virtually nothing to most everything around you.
I seem to think that this comes down to where we draw the lines. I may be bound by circumstance to a few choices. However, someone else would likely make a different choice than I would (if we had exactly the same experiences up until that point). At the same time, it is likely their genetics that would make them choose differently which they and I did not choose.
I’ll keep living like I have free will for now.
But choice depends on experience, and you’ve kinda acknowledged that experience is derived from external factors put in place by a divine entity to ensure the desired choice is made. Given this line of reasoning, you cannot really choose to accept nor reject anything.
Going even further with this line of reasoning, Jesus chose to accept torture and death “in accordance with the scriptures”, which, if taken at face value, implies that God KNEW he was going to make that choice so even His choice made while living as a mortal was just an illusion of choice.
And was this choice a result of his human biological makeup predesigned specifically so that he would have done exactly what he did in the exact situation? If this was the case, then no choice was really made even though the sacrifice and suffering was were real.
Experiences are stored in brain as patterns.
So if I had the technology. Lets say if I had a machine. And you stepped into it.
I could create a pat brain that was identical to the pat brain that went into the machine.
Now once they are out the machine obviously. The stimuli there brains are subjected to will be different. So different experiences → divergence. But up until that point same.
So to go full circle.
If universe is made of small fundamental units. These units have unique properties. We can accurately predict behaviour of these units. Then what we perceive as free will is predictable. We are just a collection of small fundamental units interacting in consistent and predictable patterns. The reality is this is incredibly complex. But if you had a powerful enough computer and sufficient understanding of the natural laws of the universe. You could predict entire trajectory of the universe. Every single event. You would in certain ways become God.
Other stories? Or meetups without stories?
I think our psychology needs the stories.
Also, the stories tell our history. And our values. I think their persistence into today is significant. These stories compete with other stories. It is very Darwinian. And the fact that they have survived thousands of years. No telling how long. Because many of the stories in the bible are pretty much taken straight from Sumer texts that are around 5000 years ago. It is very likely that these stories existed well before anyone had a means to write them down.
The supernatural aspect. Heaven and hell. Are these components significant. I don’t know. But if your going to create a story that demonstrates your societies value system might as well explain some of the worlds natural phenomena. Oh and if you want people to listen maybe there needs to be consequences for not abiding by the rules. I don’t know.
Honestly. Watch Jordan Peterson’s biblical series.
Its very interesting. Even if you disagree with him. Here is the first lecture. I may have posted it here before. Its the only one I’ve watched so far but even still its very good. Great ideas.
RE: Stories
Both of you brought up a great point I completely overlooked even though it was right in front of me and I remember reading about this rationale eons ago.
I didn’t think of it in terms of stories initially but this all makes sense. Perhaps it’s because my profession in the branding and marketing industry and bad experiences with religious charlatans that make me just switch my mind off when I hear people speak in parables.
It’s like the way Dan John writes. Nothing against the dude. I think he’s credible since big and strong guys endorse him. I just can’t read his articles because of this.
This is a good thread.
Its more than just a parable.
These stories going deep into the essence of what and who we are as a species.
Honestly. I would not do it justice if I tried to explain it. You should watch the series on YouTube.
Watch the first video I linked. Put it on 2x speed.
Yeah, I didn’t say they were parables. All I was saying is my bullshit detector goes on overdrive when people sound like they’re about to speak in parables. I don’t have the time to devote my full attention to the video until the holidays start so I won’t do it justice if the content is really good. I mostly post in between work and I spread it out throughout the day and night to prevent burnout since I’m working from home.
Just my opinion on this, but I think that too many of the stories (or rules laid out) are too morally flawed to be used as a foundation of our values. Sure, the modern church mostly does not touch the unsavory stories and rules with a 10 ft pole, but keeping those stories / rules in with the acceptable ones as a foundation of society seems a bit backwards. Perhaps the Bible should be edited to remove the worst elements. Then perhaps I could support it as a societal foundation. I just can’t accept the notion of using a book that advocates a rape victim having to marry her rapist, or condones the practice of slavery, or mandates salvation through faith alone (I find this idea pretty absurd) as a foundation of society.
I think teaching past history has value. I think teaching morals has value. I don’t necessarily think teaching the past histories’ morals as being valid has much value. I don’t think the world falls apart without religion. Just my two cents.
Correct.
Not really that, it’s more nuanced. Experience is derived from both external factors and internal factors. Like, an event happens and your personal reaction to it is all part of the collective. But event’s in the past are now only suspended in reality by your memory of it. The key word being your. Nobody else can have that exact same experience.
So, what I am trying to say is a person’s collective experience isn’t a physically tangible thing. So, what I am saying in that respect is that ‘experience’ itself, isn’t a physical thing. It’s metaphysical.
If it’s metaphysical, then it’s not material and cannot be augmented by external factors to replicate and exact result.
Okay, so bringing this back around, if we can agree that there is something metaphysical, something that does exist, but is not tangible by any measure, has to be taken into account.
I agree with your line of reasoning. That is actually my lane, that most of life is out of personal control, but we still have choice in at least some limited capacity.
The scriptures make great pains to ensure that the passion was a choice, even though it was prophesied. Which brings up other ‘potentials’, like Jesus Christ wasn’t the first, necessarily to try on being messianic, but was the one who succeeded. He was the one who lived up to the actual promise. Eh, I don’t know, spitballing on that one clearly.
So I think what I am saying that if Jesus chose not to endure the passion that perhaps he would have had to send another person, imbibed with the Spirit to succeed in the promise and we would have never heard of Jesus of Nazareth.
Perhaps. Perhaps it’s like a bad magnetic tape, but I don’t think it’s as simple as recording. But I digress.
There is a certain portion of this population whose brains would explode if you did that! Like “Why him?!” “Nooooo”
I wouldn’t turn down an ally, though…
When you say units, with unique properties are the units physical and their properties physical? Or are the units physical and the properties metaphysical?
Perhaps. It depends a lot on whether or not you believe in a duel nature of physical objects. For instance, an atom and the natural laws that govern the atom’s behavior.
So do you think that an atom could exist, separately from the laws that bound it or that they are bound together. I.E. the natural law that governs an atom, can exist with or without the atom actually physically existing.
I’m not educated enough on the bible actually. I was just applying the line of thought pertaining to free will to this. I’m always willing to learn more as long as it’s not someone giving me crap redundant stuff like “but the bible says this literally so it’s true while other shit I don’t agree with isn’t supposed to be literal so it’s false”. Which doesn’t mean I don’t acknowledge the experts’ interpretation that, for example, the story of Adam and Eve may not be literal. It’s more to do with people with the same amount of knowledge I have selectively interpreting shit.
But we cannot make the assumption that it’s metaphysical. For example, every single experience could have been planned with the pre-knowledge that the “choice” made would be inevitable given one’s biological makeup, which could have been purposefully influenced and remodelled in every single event and interaction in one’s life from the start which were due to some uber complex engineering and not some randomly occurring natural phenomena.
Whomever did this could be considered metaphysical, though.
Jesus wasn’t, or isn’t, a person you moron.
Yeah, Jesus was a divine person. A non-divine person “imbibed with the Spirit” would have been made a saint and wouldn’t have been able to absolve humans of Original Sin unless he was Keanu Reeves… Not sure where that logic is coming from.
Maybe’s @pat is a Nestorian?